Last week I got an e-mail update from the Life Extension Foundation, entitled "Omega-3 fatty acids reduce prostate cancer growth".
It came from the August issue of the journal Clinical Cancer Research as they published the finding of researchers at UCLA. The study reinforces the concept I have stated for over 4 years. That the ratio between Omega 6 to Omega 3 Fatty Acids, is responsible for increased inflammation in the body which increases our chances of developing issues such as heart disease, arthritis and cancer.
This study showed that a greater ratio of omega-3 to omega-6 fatty acids in the diet was associated with a reduction in prostate tumor growth rates and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels in a mouse model of hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. Omega-3 fatty acids consist of EPA and DHA, and are found in oily fish and ALA, found in flax and other plants. Omega-6 fatty acids are found mainly in vegetable oils such as those derived from corn and safflower, and are also found in red meat.
By increasing the ratio of Omega 3 to Omega 6 fatty acids, the research team found a 22 percent average reduction in tumor cell growth rates and 77 percent lower PSA levels among mice who received the omega-3 fatty acids compared to animals whose dietary fats were predominantly omega-6. Omega 6 fatty acids are pro-inflammatory and Omega 3's are anti-inflammatory.
The LEF stated that the study is among the first to demonstrate the effect of reducing a prostate cancer- promoting inflammatory response via the diet. Dr Aronson commented, "Corn oil is the backbone of the American diet. We consume up to 20 times more omega-6 fatty acids in our diet compared to omega-3 acids. This study strongly suggests that eating a healthier ratio of these two types of fatty acids may make a difference in reducing prostate cancer growth, but studies need to be conducted in humans before any clinical recommendations can be made."
"We may be able to use EPA and DHA supplements while also reducing omega-6 fatty acids in the diet as a cancer prevention tool or possibly to reduce progression in men with prostate cancer," Dr Aronson added.
We thank LEF for sharing this information with us.
NSI Omega 3 Fatty Acids
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Please visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Click here if you would like to subscribe to our free HealthBlogger News Letter.
Write... add me to your list on the subject line.
Please pass these on to anyone you want.
Tuesday, August 01, 2006
Monday, July 31, 2006
Spenda - Is natural always better?
In most cases I would always say yes. But here is my dilemma. I know we eat too much sugar and I know it has been responsible for many health issues from obesity to Type II Diabetes. While I like Stevia, some don't like the taste. From a scientific stand point, I have to sometimes be practical and go with what I have evidence on and not condemn something just because it is not made directly by nature. When I first began studying nutrition I always thought natural was better, until I learned for example that fats not treated with preservatives become rancid, and that rancid fats produce more toxic effects on the body than the preservatives did. Also, just because something is natural does not mean that it is good for you, nature produces many poisonous substances. Just the same, just because we change the molecular structure of a molecule like sugar, to produce a substance that does not play with our blood sugar, does not mean it's bad. In 8 years of using products in weight loss that use Splenda, I have never seen a bad reaction. A person can be allergic to anything, so some may have issues because of this. That does not make it poison. So, until I see valid studies that indicate Spenda is bad, I have to recommend it over sugar. But by all means, use Stevia first when ever you can, if you think it is better.
Questions people have raised about Splenda and the scientific answers...
"Sucralose is a chlorinated sucrose molecule."
That's correct, but the innuendo is that sucralose is bad because it contains a form of chlorine. Not so. Sucralose does not contain elemental chlorine--it's chloride, the same form of chlorine found in table salt, tomatoes, and many other vegetables and fruits.
"There are few studies that have examined the long-term effectiveness of sucralose."
There are over 70 studies on sucralose published in peer-reviewed journals. None have demonstrated an increase in mutageneticy, miscarriage rates, birth defects, or anything else that would be a cause for concern. Sucralose was approved for use in Canada and some European countries 15 years ago; if there were health challenges associated with sucralose use, they should have emerged by now. They haven't.
"Sucralose caused shrunken thymus glands in rodents."
This accusation about the negative effects of sucralose on the thymus fails to note that the mice were given doses 5,000 times sweeter than a human would ever eat. In fact, the mice refused to eat because the food was too sweet--and since they didn't eat, they lost weight. It was the weight loss that caused the thymus to shrink, not the sucralose. In spite of that, the rats fed the high amounts of sucralose were able to mate successfully; their progeny were also fed the high amounts of sucralose, also experienced the same effects on the thymus, and also reproduced successfully (3).
"Sucralose caused caecal enlargement in rats."
The implication is that this is bad for the digestive system (the caecum is the first part of the large bowel). Two points: first, when rodents eat anything that changes the fluid levels in their gut, they experience caecal enlargement. It happens with many food additives that are given to rodents in amounts thousands of times greater per body weight than a human would ever ingest. Second, and even more interesting, is that sorbitol, one of the approved sweeteners endorsed by anti-sucralose websites, also causes caecal enlargement when given in large doses (4).
"Almost all of the websites critical of sucralose endorse Stevia as a sweetener."
This is an extract of the Stevia rebaudiana plant from Brazil. But did you know that there have been only 92 studies on Stevia? Did you also realize that Stevia may cause infertility (5)? That's the same type of fact-stretching employed by the anti-sucralose websites, but that study was done on Stevia in rodents and those are the results. The point is you can find a negative study on just about any food or food additive, but you don't judge a product on the strength of one study. The sum total of research should be examined in order to come to a conclusion--something the anti-sucralose advocates refuse to do.
"The manufacturer did the research."
True. But who should pay for the research? A competitor? The sugar industry? The U.S. Food and Drug Administration--in other words, our tax dollars? If the research arm of the U.S. government, the National Institutes of Health, funds research on all food additives, who'll decide the order in which things get tested? These websites state the obvious and then imply that it's bad. Fine. They should prove it by showing that the published results were tainted in some way. Better yet, they should raise the money and fund the research. It's easy to sit on the sidelines and take cheap shots.
The Food & Drug Administration has approved the use of this low-calorie sweetener.
The American Diabetes Association accepts the FDA's conclusion that these sweeteners are safe and can be part of a healthy diet. The position of the American Dietetic Association is that consumers can safely enjoy a range of nutritive and nonnutritive sweeteners when consumed in a reasonable diet (6). Countries world-wide including Canada and the European Union have approved Sucralose for use in their countries. These associations and countries came to this conclusion based on research and science, not innuendo, misrepresenting the research, and exaggerating anecdotal observations.
References:
1. Putnam, J., at al. U.S. Per Capita Food Supply Trends: More Calories, Refined Carbohydrates, and Fats. Economic Research Service, USDA. Food Review, Winter 2002.
2. Henkel, John. Sugar Substitutes: Americans Opt for Sweetness and Lite. FDA Consumer Revised December 2004.
3. Kille JW, et al. Sucralose: lack of effects on sperm glycolysis and reproduction in the rat. Food Chem Toxicol. 2000;38 Suppl 2:S19-29.
4. MacKenzie KM, et al. Three-generation reproduction study of rats ingesting up to 10% sorbitol in the diet--and a brief review of the toxicological status of sorbitol. Food Chem Toxicol. 1986; 24(3):191-200.
5. Melis MS. Effects of chronic administration of Stevia rebaudiana on fertility in rats. J Ethnopharmacol. 1999 Nov 1;67(2):157-61.
6. Position of the American Dietetic Association: Use of Nutritive and Nonnutritive Sweeteners. J Am Diet Assoc. 2004;104:255-275.
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Please visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Click here if you would like to subscribe to our free HealthBlogger News Letter.
Write... add me to your list on the subject line.
Please pass these on to anyone you want.
Questions people have raised about Splenda and the scientific answers...
"Sucralose is a chlorinated sucrose molecule."
That's correct, but the innuendo is that sucralose is bad because it contains a form of chlorine. Not so. Sucralose does not contain elemental chlorine--it's chloride, the same form of chlorine found in table salt, tomatoes, and many other vegetables and fruits.
"There are few studies that have examined the long-term effectiveness of sucralose."
There are over 70 studies on sucralose published in peer-reviewed journals. None have demonstrated an increase in mutageneticy, miscarriage rates, birth defects, or anything else that would be a cause for concern. Sucralose was approved for use in Canada and some European countries 15 years ago; if there were health challenges associated with sucralose use, they should have emerged by now. They haven't.
"Sucralose caused shrunken thymus glands in rodents."
This accusation about the negative effects of sucralose on the thymus fails to note that the mice were given doses 5,000 times sweeter than a human would ever eat. In fact, the mice refused to eat because the food was too sweet--and since they didn't eat, they lost weight. It was the weight loss that caused the thymus to shrink, not the sucralose. In spite of that, the rats fed the high amounts of sucralose were able to mate successfully; their progeny were also fed the high amounts of sucralose, also experienced the same effects on the thymus, and also reproduced successfully (3).
"Sucralose caused caecal enlargement in rats."
The implication is that this is bad for the digestive system (the caecum is the first part of the large bowel). Two points: first, when rodents eat anything that changes the fluid levels in their gut, they experience caecal enlargement. It happens with many food additives that are given to rodents in amounts thousands of times greater per body weight than a human would ever ingest. Second, and even more interesting, is that sorbitol, one of the approved sweeteners endorsed by anti-sucralose websites, also causes caecal enlargement when given in large doses (4).
"Almost all of the websites critical of sucralose endorse Stevia as a sweetener."
This is an extract of the Stevia rebaudiana plant from Brazil. But did you know that there have been only 92 studies on Stevia? Did you also realize that Stevia may cause infertility (5)? That's the same type of fact-stretching employed by the anti-sucralose websites, but that study was done on Stevia in rodents and those are the results. The point is you can find a negative study on just about any food or food additive, but you don't judge a product on the strength of one study. The sum total of research should be examined in order to come to a conclusion--something the anti-sucralose advocates refuse to do.
"The manufacturer did the research."
True. But who should pay for the research? A competitor? The sugar industry? The U.S. Food and Drug Administration--in other words, our tax dollars? If the research arm of the U.S. government, the National Institutes of Health, funds research on all food additives, who'll decide the order in which things get tested? These websites state the obvious and then imply that it's bad. Fine. They should prove it by showing that the published results were tainted in some way. Better yet, they should raise the money and fund the research. It's easy to sit on the sidelines and take cheap shots.
The Food & Drug Administration has approved the use of this low-calorie sweetener.
The American Diabetes Association accepts the FDA's conclusion that these sweeteners are safe and can be part of a healthy diet. The position of the American Dietetic Association is that consumers can safely enjoy a range of nutritive and nonnutritive sweeteners when consumed in a reasonable diet (6). Countries world-wide including Canada and the European Union have approved Sucralose for use in their countries. These associations and countries came to this conclusion based on research and science, not innuendo, misrepresenting the research, and exaggerating anecdotal observations.
References:
1. Putnam, J., at al. U.S. Per Capita Food Supply Trends: More Calories, Refined Carbohydrates, and Fats. Economic Research Service, USDA. Food Review, Winter 2002.
2. Henkel, John. Sugar Substitutes: Americans Opt for Sweetness and Lite. FDA Consumer Revised December 2004.
3. Kille JW, et al. Sucralose: lack of effects on sperm glycolysis and reproduction in the rat. Food Chem Toxicol. 2000;38 Suppl 2:S19-29.
4. MacKenzie KM, et al. Three-generation reproduction study of rats ingesting up to 10% sorbitol in the diet--and a brief review of the toxicological status of sorbitol. Food Chem Toxicol. 1986; 24(3):191-200.
5. Melis MS. Effects of chronic administration of Stevia rebaudiana on fertility in rats. J Ethnopharmacol. 1999 Nov 1;67(2):157-61.
6. Position of the American Dietetic Association: Use of Nutritive and Nonnutritive Sweeteners. J Am Diet Assoc. 2004;104:255-275.
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Please visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Click here if you would like to subscribe to our free HealthBlogger News Letter.
Write... add me to your list on the subject line.
Please pass these on to anyone you want.
Friday, July 28, 2006
Omega 3 Fatty Acids and Alpha Lipoic Acid found better than drugs...
3 studies came out in July that show just how powerful supplements can be in preventing and treating disease.
The first study was published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition and was authored by Chenchen Wang and associates from Tufts-New England Medical Center. The report showed that Omega 3's from fish oil supplements containing EPA & DHA, had strong heart health benefits. Because there has been controversy on whether Omega 3's are effective in the areas of heart health, they decided to only consider studies that lasted for more than 1 year and that reported Omega 3 intake levels and outcomes after there use. The dosage range was from approximately 270 mgs to 4.8 gms per day. The largest study using 850 mgs of both EPA & DHA, was found to reduce the risk of all-cause mortality by 21 per cent, cardiac death by 35 per cent, and sudden death by 45 per cent.
Another study, also published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, showed that fish oils are more effective than the use of the statin drug Lipitor, in positively affecting the levels of HDL ("good") cholesterol in obese and insulin-resistant men. In the six-week study, fish oils and Lipitor were given to 48 men, both separately and combined. Together both the Liptior & the fish oil greatly lowered plasma triacylglycerols and raised HDL cholesterol levels, but only the fish oil influenced HDL cholesterol in such a way as to improve it's breakdown metabolically from complex molecules metabolically, into simpler ones for removal from the body.
In yet another study, published in the American Diabetes Association Journal, and sent to me by The Life Extention Foundation, showed that Alpha-lipoic acid completely prevents atherosclerosis in diabetic mice.
In this study, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill found that giving alpha-lipoic acid to mice in whom diabetes was induced prevented the increase in cholesterol, atherosclerotic lesions and health deterioration that the disease would otherwise cause. Alpha-lipoic acid is a potent antioxidant that increases the effects of Vitamin C & E in the body and has been used to treat diabetic neuropathy in the past successfully. However, nobody yet had studied its effects in diabetic cardiovascular disease.
After four weeks on a regular diet, diabetic and nondiabetic mice were given a high fat diet enhanced with alpha-lipoic acid or the same diet without alpha-lipoic acid. After twenty weeks, both diabetic and nondiabetic animals supplemented with alpha-lipoic acid had lower markers of oxidative stress and higher levels of red blood cell glutathione compared to mice that did not receive the compound.
"Remarkably," said the authors write, "alpha-lipoic acid completely prevented the increase in plasma total cholesterol, atherosclerotic lesions, and the general deterioration of health caused by diabetes."
"In summary, our study demonstrates that dietary supplementation of alpha-lipoic acid for 20 weeks completely protects apoplipoprotein E-negative mice from enhancement of aortic atherosclerosis caused by STZ-induced diabetes," the authors conclude. "Our results suggest that dietary alpha-lipoic acid is a promising agent for reducing cardiovascular complications of diabetes."
Please see just how powerful ALA is especially when combined with L-Carnitine.
Understand fats - which ones are really good for you and which are bad.
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Please visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Click here if you would like to subscribe to our free HealthBlogger News Letter.
Write... add me to your list on the subject line.Please pass these on to anyone you want.
The first study was published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition and was authored by Chenchen Wang and associates from Tufts-New England Medical Center. The report showed that Omega 3's from fish oil supplements containing EPA & DHA, had strong heart health benefits. Because there has been controversy on whether Omega 3's are effective in the areas of heart health, they decided to only consider studies that lasted for more than 1 year and that reported Omega 3 intake levels and outcomes after there use. The dosage range was from approximately 270 mgs to 4.8 gms per day. The largest study using 850 mgs of both EPA & DHA, was found to reduce the risk of all-cause mortality by 21 per cent, cardiac death by 35 per cent, and sudden death by 45 per cent.
Another study, also published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, showed that fish oils are more effective than the use of the statin drug Lipitor, in positively affecting the levels of HDL ("good") cholesterol in obese and insulin-resistant men. In the six-week study, fish oils and Lipitor were given to 48 men, both separately and combined. Together both the Liptior & the fish oil greatly lowered plasma triacylglycerols and raised HDL cholesterol levels, but only the fish oil influenced HDL cholesterol in such a way as to improve it's breakdown metabolically from complex molecules metabolically, into simpler ones for removal from the body.
In yet another study, published in the American Diabetes Association Journal, and sent to me by The Life Extention Foundation, showed that Alpha-lipoic acid completely prevents atherosclerosis in diabetic mice.
In this study, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill found that giving alpha-lipoic acid to mice in whom diabetes was induced prevented the increase in cholesterol, atherosclerotic lesions and health deterioration that the disease would otherwise cause. Alpha-lipoic acid is a potent antioxidant that increases the effects of Vitamin C & E in the body and has been used to treat diabetic neuropathy in the past successfully. However, nobody yet had studied its effects in diabetic cardiovascular disease.
After four weeks on a regular diet, diabetic and nondiabetic mice were given a high fat diet enhanced with alpha-lipoic acid or the same diet without alpha-lipoic acid. After twenty weeks, both diabetic and nondiabetic animals supplemented with alpha-lipoic acid had lower markers of oxidative stress and higher levels of red blood cell glutathione compared to mice that did not receive the compound.
"Remarkably," said the authors write, "alpha-lipoic acid completely prevented the increase in plasma total cholesterol, atherosclerotic lesions, and the general deterioration of health caused by diabetes."
"In summary, our study demonstrates that dietary supplementation of alpha-lipoic acid for 20 weeks completely protects apoplipoprotein E-negative mice from enhancement of aortic atherosclerosis caused by STZ-induced diabetes," the authors conclude. "Our results suggest that dietary alpha-lipoic acid is a promising agent for reducing cardiovascular complications of diabetes."
Please see just how powerful ALA is especially when combined with L-Carnitine.
Understand fats - which ones are really good for you and which are bad.
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Please visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Click here if you would like to subscribe to our free HealthBlogger News Letter.
Write... add me to your list on the subject line.Please pass these on to anyone you want.
Monday, July 24, 2006
Phytonutrient in the news...
Chilli could boost insulin control, says study...
24/07/2006-
Regular consumption of chilli pepper could improve control of insulin levels after eating, helping obese people and diabetics manage their levels, says research from Australia.Chilli pepper, a rich source of antioxidants, has previously been linked to inhibiting the growth of pancreatic cancer cells, and has been suggested to cut fat and energy intake when added to the diet.
And now researchers from the University of Tasmania have reported the findings of small human trial, which showed that regular consumption of a chilli-containing meal could improve insulin control by about 60 per cent.
Subjects ate their normal (bland) diet for four weeks, and then crossed over to the chilli-diet for a further four weeks. The chilli blend was provided by MasterFoods, Australia who also reported that the capsaicin content was about 33 mg per 30 grams of chilli blend.
The researchers did not attempt to extract the capsaicin, the active ingredient that gives the chilli its heat, and it should be noted that chilli also contains antioxidants such as lutein, vitamin C, and beta-carotene.
It was found that after the chilli diet regime the blood glucose levels increased less that for the bland diet.
Comment: Capsaicin is the ingredient found in different types of peppers, such as cayenne peppers, that makes the peppers hot. You can eat it in raw or cooked peppers or as a dried powder, which you can add to food or drinks. It also is available as a dietary supplement and in topical creams that you apply to your skin.
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Click here if you would like to subscribe to our free HealthBlogger News Letter.
Write... add me to your list on the subject line.
Please pass these on to anyone you want.
24/07/2006-
Regular consumption of chilli pepper could improve control of insulin levels after eating, helping obese people and diabetics manage their levels, says research from Australia.Chilli pepper, a rich source of antioxidants, has previously been linked to inhibiting the growth of pancreatic cancer cells, and has been suggested to cut fat and energy intake when added to the diet.
And now researchers from the University of Tasmania have reported the findings of small human trial, which showed that regular consumption of a chilli-containing meal could improve insulin control by about 60 per cent.
Subjects ate their normal (bland) diet for four weeks, and then crossed over to the chilli-diet for a further four weeks. The chilli blend was provided by MasterFoods, Australia who also reported that the capsaicin content was about 33 mg per 30 grams of chilli blend.
The researchers did not attempt to extract the capsaicin, the active ingredient that gives the chilli its heat, and it should be noted that chilli also contains antioxidants such as lutein, vitamin C, and beta-carotene.
It was found that after the chilli diet regime the blood glucose levels increased less that for the bland diet.
Comment: Capsaicin is the ingredient found in different types of peppers, such as cayenne peppers, that makes the peppers hot. You can eat it in raw or cooked peppers or as a dried powder, which you can add to food or drinks. It also is available as a dietary supplement and in topical creams that you apply to your skin.
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Click here if you would like to subscribe to our free HealthBlogger News Letter.
Write... add me to your list on the subject line.
Please pass these on to anyone you want.
Saturday, July 22, 2006
Why I recommend people take charge of their own health, and get off drugs whenever possible...
The National Academy of Sciences Institute of Medicine estimates at least 1.5 million adverse drug events are preventable.
The study, "Preventing Medical Errors" found that while some of the adverse drug events that occur each year in the United States are inevitable due to the many side effects of drugs in general, at least one quarter, or 1.5 million of these "ADE"s are due to errors in prescribing, dispensing, administering, or monitoring medications. Even without taking into account errors of omission in prescribing drugs, the authors of the study note that the true number of preventable errors is probably much higher than the 1.5 million figure.
The authors of the IOM report state that on average, a hospital patient is subject to at least one medication error per day (although rates vary across facilities), which increases the cost of hospitalization significantly. One study of Medicare patients estimated a cost of $887 million dollars resulting from the treatment of medication errors each year, which did not include lost earnings or pain and suffering rewards.
To combat this situation, the report recommends a greater partnership between patients and health care providers. Patients need to assume more responsibility by monitoring the effects of their medications, keeping records, and communicating with their physicians. In turn, the health care system needs to provide more and better information to patients concerning the medications they are taking, and offer more opportunities for patients to consult with their providers. Additionally, electronic prescription systems should be implemented which will eliminate errors that arise from hand-written prescriptions. These systems also provide information on the drugs being prescribed and can interface with patient history to determine the presence of allergies, or other drugs in use by the patient, and this information can be transferred along with the patient to other facilities.
Better labeling and packaging of medications by the manufacturer is another area that can be improved to help eliminate medication errors.
The authors of the report conclude that "the current state of affairs is not acceptable." They recommend federally funded studies on the prevention of medication errors, and that more training in medication management be required by accreditation agencies.
Comment: I think that everyone needs to look at what drugs they're taking and see what their side effects are. Then try to see if you can taper down or illuminate some, if possible.
Please review this blog... You may not believe it, but it's true.
http://cwiechert.blogspot.com/2005/03/whats-3rd-leading-cause-of-death-in-us.html
Check your drugs for side effects.
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Click here if you would like to subscribe to our free HealthBlogger News Letter.
Write... add me to your list on the subject line. Please pass these on to anyone you want.
The study, "Preventing Medical Errors" found that while some of the adverse drug events that occur each year in the United States are inevitable due to the many side effects of drugs in general, at least one quarter, or 1.5 million of these "ADE"s are due to errors in prescribing, dispensing, administering, or monitoring medications. Even without taking into account errors of omission in prescribing drugs, the authors of the study note that the true number of preventable errors is probably much higher than the 1.5 million figure.
The authors of the IOM report state that on average, a hospital patient is subject to at least one medication error per day (although rates vary across facilities), which increases the cost of hospitalization significantly. One study of Medicare patients estimated a cost of $887 million dollars resulting from the treatment of medication errors each year, which did not include lost earnings or pain and suffering rewards.
To combat this situation, the report recommends a greater partnership between patients and health care providers. Patients need to assume more responsibility by monitoring the effects of their medications, keeping records, and communicating with their physicians. In turn, the health care system needs to provide more and better information to patients concerning the medications they are taking, and offer more opportunities for patients to consult with their providers. Additionally, electronic prescription systems should be implemented which will eliminate errors that arise from hand-written prescriptions. These systems also provide information on the drugs being prescribed and can interface with patient history to determine the presence of allergies, or other drugs in use by the patient, and this information can be transferred along with the patient to other facilities.
Better labeling and packaging of medications by the manufacturer is another area that can be improved to help eliminate medication errors.
The authors of the report conclude that "the current state of affairs is not acceptable." They recommend federally funded studies on the prevention of medication errors, and that more training in medication management be required by accreditation agencies.
Comment: I think that everyone needs to look at what drugs they're taking and see what their side effects are. Then try to see if you can taper down or illuminate some, if possible.
Please review this blog... You may not believe it, but it's true.
http://cwiechert.blogspot.com/2005/03/whats-3rd-leading-cause-of-death-in-us.html
Check your drugs for side effects.
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Click here if you would like to subscribe to our free HealthBlogger News Letter.
Write... add me to your list on the subject line. Please pass these on to anyone you want.
Thursday, July 20, 2006
Some tips on losing body fat, faster...
Here are some tips on losing body fat faster. These tips will not include tricks that are designed to lose water weight fast with herbal diuretics, forcing the bowel to empty fast with herbal bowel laxatives and or excess magnesium, nor will it be a faster way to lose muscle by starving for a weekend. These are scientific tips for improving fat lose, especially around the stomach, were the body likes to store it for that rainy day or famine, you will never, ever have. Most of these techniques increase Thermogenesis (heat production metabolically) and Glucagon (a hormone that your pancreas makes that's burns glucose and triglicerides).
1. Eat 6-7 times a day - Eat something with protein in it every 3 hours or so up to 7 times per day. This includes breakfast, lunch and dinner. Between meal snacks should consist of between 6 to 11 grams of protein from a half a protein bar, low fat cottage cheese, a handful of raw nuts or dry roasted peanuts, or plain low fat yogurt etc. If you eat this way, you will burn 40% more calories than if you consumed a high carb alternative. Never allow yourself to be hungry. A recent study found that people who added 3 servings of yogurt a day between meals, lost 61% more body fat and 81% more belly fat, than those that did not. Very soon, your regular meals will become smaller, as you will not be famished.
2. Don't eat dinner after 6pm at night. Protein snack are ok, even if you wake up hungry at night. A University of Minnesota study recently showed that, on a 2,000-calorie diet, those who ate most of their calories earliest in the day, lost weight and those that did the opposite, actually gained weight. The difference was around 2 pounds per week gain or loss.
3. Take a walk 15 - 30 minutes after you eat. Studies show that you have about a 10% increase in your metabolic rate after you eat. By walking, you can perhaps double that rate to 20%.
4. Lower the temperature in your house. You will soon adapt to the lower temps and you will burn more calories in order to keep your body at 98.6 degrees. We are designed to gain weight in spring and summer, so we can burn fat during the cold months, in the form of heat. The more you rely on the thermostat to keep you warm, the less you will burn yourself. Removing some covers at night to cause a slight lowering of your body temp, can allow you to burn 200 more calories during the night. If you sat in a pool at 72 degrees for 1 hour, you will burn about 600 calories. If you ran for an hour, you would burn around 350 to 400 calories. Get the point?
5. Sip ice water during the day. A German study showed that this can boost your metabolism, the rate at which you burn calories, by more than 30% for up to 90 minutes after the cold infusion. While were on the subject, just drinking water helps you lose fat, but now I think ice water might be even better. Avoid this with meals though... Just between meals and snacks please.
The New England Journal of Medicine reported other benefits from eating this way.
1. Cholesterol levels were reduced 15%.
2. Cortisol levels were reduced by 17%. Cortisol can increase stress related weight gain and cravings.
3. Insulin declined by nearly 28%. This keeps your appetite down, your cravings under control, and fat away from your middle.
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Click here if you would like to subscribe to our free HealthBlogger News Letter. Write... add me to your list on the subject line.
Please pass these on to anyone you want.
1. Eat 6-7 times a day - Eat something with protein in it every 3 hours or so up to 7 times per day. This includes breakfast, lunch and dinner. Between meal snacks should consist of between 6 to 11 grams of protein from a half a protein bar, low fat cottage cheese, a handful of raw nuts or dry roasted peanuts, or plain low fat yogurt etc. If you eat this way, you will burn 40% more calories than if you consumed a high carb alternative. Never allow yourself to be hungry. A recent study found that people who added 3 servings of yogurt a day between meals, lost 61% more body fat and 81% more belly fat, than those that did not. Very soon, your regular meals will become smaller, as you will not be famished.
2. Don't eat dinner after 6pm at night. Protein snack are ok, even if you wake up hungry at night. A University of Minnesota study recently showed that, on a 2,000-calorie diet, those who ate most of their calories earliest in the day, lost weight and those that did the opposite, actually gained weight. The difference was around 2 pounds per week gain or loss.
3. Take a walk 15 - 30 minutes after you eat. Studies show that you have about a 10% increase in your metabolic rate after you eat. By walking, you can perhaps double that rate to 20%.
4. Lower the temperature in your house. You will soon adapt to the lower temps and you will burn more calories in order to keep your body at 98.6 degrees. We are designed to gain weight in spring and summer, so we can burn fat during the cold months, in the form of heat. The more you rely on the thermostat to keep you warm, the less you will burn yourself. Removing some covers at night to cause a slight lowering of your body temp, can allow you to burn 200 more calories during the night. If you sat in a pool at 72 degrees for 1 hour, you will burn about 600 calories. If you ran for an hour, you would burn around 350 to 400 calories. Get the point?
5. Sip ice water during the day. A German study showed that this can boost your metabolism, the rate at which you burn calories, by more than 30% for up to 90 minutes after the cold infusion. While were on the subject, just drinking water helps you lose fat, but now I think ice water might be even better. Avoid this with meals though... Just between meals and snacks please.
The New England Journal of Medicine reported other benefits from eating this way.
1. Cholesterol levels were reduced 15%.
2. Cortisol levels were reduced by 17%. Cortisol can increase stress related weight gain and cravings.
3. Insulin declined by nearly 28%. This keeps your appetite down, your cravings under control, and fat away from your middle.
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Click here if you would like to subscribe to our free HealthBlogger News Letter. Write... add me to your list on the subject line.
Please pass these on to anyone you want.
Sunday, July 16, 2006
Great marketing - deceptive advertising...
It's all over the TV. Commercials that claim that you can now have pizza, pasta, burgers and even chocolate everyday day and you can lose weight. How? Through the miracle breakthrough of The Glycemic Index, the ads say. I will not mention the company's name, because I don't want to advertise for them, but I bet you know who I am referring to. The pictures on the ad show packages of food that seems to be like the food you most likely eat already, and yet, you will lose weight. Now when you look at The Glycemic Index, you will notice that all these foods mentioned above are relatively high on the scale and therefore, the only way a diet plan like this can work is if it is designed to be a caloric restrictive program in disguise. Perhaps the chocolate they sell is made with artificial sugar, but the breads & grains will still elevate your insulin levels, which will not be good long term for most of you. Caloric restrictive programs fail 90% of the time within a year and 95% of the time over a 5 year period because it ends up lowering your metabolism to the point where you will be more susceptible to gaining the weight back, once you go back to a normal diet, which you will. Why am I sure of that, because you will not continue to eat their package food for life, it's too expensive and too restrictive. I believe 75% of the worlds population has trouble with grains, cereals, sugar and starchy vegetables. The other 25% can deal very well with most of these foods, without developing health issues. Of the 75% that have trouble, they will develop everything from hypoglycemia, or low blood sugar, weight gain, type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure, fluid retention, acid reflux, polycystic ovary syndrome, high cholesterol, high tryclerides, to cancer and heart disease. Insulin here is the culprit.
What is the purpose of insulin?
What is the purpose of insulin in humans? Your doctor will say that it's to lower blood sugar, but that it is just a trivial side effect. Insulin's evolutionary purpose is to store excess nutrients, especially body fat.
We come from a time of feast and famine when if we couldn't store the excess energy during times of feasting, we would not be here because all of our ancestors encountered famine at one time or another. We are only here because our ancestors were able to store nutrients, which they were able to do because they were able to elevate their insulin levels in response to any elevation in energy that the organism encountered. Even fruits, honey and berries during the summer eaten along with other high fat foods like nuts and seeds.
When your body notices that sugar is elevated, it is a sign that you've got more than you need; you are not burning it so it is accumulating in your blood. So insulin will be released to take that sugar and store it. How does it do this? With glycogen?
Your body stores very little glycogen at any one time. All the glycogen stored in your liver and muscle wouldn't last you through one active day. Once you fill up your glycogen stores, they are carried to the fat cells by tryclerides in your blood and then stored as saturated fat in your fat cells, especially around the abdomen areas.
So the idea of the medical profession recommending a high complex-carbohydrate, low-saturated-fat diet as an absolute plan for weight-loss is ridicules. A high-complex-carbohydrate diet is nothing but a high-glucose diet, or a high-sugar diet. Your body is just going to store it as saturated fat, and the body makes it into saturated fat quite readily.
You may be able to have pizza, pasta, burgers and even chocolate once a week for a treat, for say 1 meal, but to tell people otherwise is in my oppinion a marketing ploy that will attract alot of people into the program, but they will not be well served. The only way I know how to lose weight long term is to eat protein often, reduce high glycemic carbs like breads, cereals, pasta, sugar, potatoes, rice, high fructose corn syrup etc to no more than 45 grams of carbs per day or 15 grams per meal. Please read the books Life Without Bread & Protein Power for reference. Proteins and green vegetables can be for the most part eaten in unlimited portions, but even fruits must be thought of as a treat food, for most people wanting to lose weight.
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Have your nutritional questions answered by e-mail: www.cwiechert.com/QAMAIL.html
What is the purpose of insulin?
What is the purpose of insulin in humans? Your doctor will say that it's to lower blood sugar, but that it is just a trivial side effect. Insulin's evolutionary purpose is to store excess nutrients, especially body fat.
We come from a time of feast and famine when if we couldn't store the excess energy during times of feasting, we would not be here because all of our ancestors encountered famine at one time or another. We are only here because our ancestors were able to store nutrients, which they were able to do because they were able to elevate their insulin levels in response to any elevation in energy that the organism encountered. Even fruits, honey and berries during the summer eaten along with other high fat foods like nuts and seeds.
When your body notices that sugar is elevated, it is a sign that you've got more than you need; you are not burning it so it is accumulating in your blood. So insulin will be released to take that sugar and store it. How does it do this? With glycogen?
Your body stores very little glycogen at any one time. All the glycogen stored in your liver and muscle wouldn't last you through one active day. Once you fill up your glycogen stores, they are carried to the fat cells by tryclerides in your blood and then stored as saturated fat in your fat cells, especially around the abdomen areas.
So the idea of the medical profession recommending a high complex-carbohydrate, low-saturated-fat diet as an absolute plan for weight-loss is ridicules. A high-complex-carbohydrate diet is nothing but a high-glucose diet, or a high-sugar diet. Your body is just going to store it as saturated fat, and the body makes it into saturated fat quite readily.
You may be able to have pizza, pasta, burgers and even chocolate once a week for a treat, for say 1 meal, but to tell people otherwise is in my oppinion a marketing ploy that will attract alot of people into the program, but they will not be well served. The only way I know how to lose weight long term is to eat protein often, reduce high glycemic carbs like breads, cereals, pasta, sugar, potatoes, rice, high fructose corn syrup etc to no more than 45 grams of carbs per day or 15 grams per meal. Please read the books Life Without Bread & Protein Power for reference. Proteins and green vegetables can be for the most part eaten in unlimited portions, but even fruits must be thought of as a treat food, for most people wanting to lose weight.
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Have your nutritional questions answered by e-mail: www.cwiechert.com/QAMAIL.html
Thursday, July 13, 2006
Healthy lifestyle habits more important than drugs for the health of the heart...
George Bernard Shaw was once quoted as saying...
"Everything I eat has been proved by some doctor or other to be a deadly poison, and everything I don't eat has been proved to be indespensable for life. But I go marching on".
Well, while some people have contitutions like an ox and can do most things wrong and get away with it, my brother being one on those fortunate people. The rest of us would benefit greatly from diet modifications and getting more exercise. This study published by Reuters is an example of just how powerful lifestyle changes can be. There is no substitute.
cw
Lifestyle trumps drugs for a healthy heart
Eating right, exercising can help cut risk of heart problems by 87 percent
By Amanda Beck
Reuters
WASHINGTON - Even men who take medication for high blood pressure or cholesterol can dramatically cut their risk of heart disease by adopting a healthy lifestyle, U.S. researchers reported on Monday.
Middle-aged men on these medications can reduce their chances of heart problems by 57 percent by eating right, not smoking, drinking in moderation and maintaining a healthy weight while exercising regularly, the researchers said.
Those who do not take the drugs can cut their risk of heart ailments by 87 percent if they adopt these lifestyle choices.
"This shows there's no substitute for a healthy lifestyle," said Stephanie Chiuve, lead author of the study to be published in Circulation: Journal of The American Heart Association.
The study tracked 43,000 men between 40 and 75 who were free of diabetes, heart disease and other chronic conditions when the study began in 1986. They completed biannual questionnaires and researchers used the data to tease out correlations between heart disease and lifestyle habits.
The benefits of the healthy habits were apparent even if they were adopted over time.
"In other words, it's never to late to change," said Chiuve. "You can still achieve benefits if you make changes in middle age or later in life."
Men with the lowest risk of heart disease were those who practiced all five healthy habits, but not smoking alone reduced the risk of heart problems by 50 percent, she said.
Comment: While there is controversy on what constitutes a healthy diet, I feel the more you adopt a diet that mimics the Hunter-Gatherer's that have and still do roam the earth, the better of you will be. Also there are alternative approaches to drugs to improve heart disease and type 2 diabetes in those who would prefer taking less drugs.
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Have your nutritional questions answered by e-mail: www.cwiechert.com/QAMAIL.html
"Everything I eat has been proved by some doctor or other to be a deadly poison, and everything I don't eat has been proved to be indespensable for life. But I go marching on".
Well, while some people have contitutions like an ox and can do most things wrong and get away with it, my brother being one on those fortunate people. The rest of us would benefit greatly from diet modifications and getting more exercise. This study published by Reuters is an example of just how powerful lifestyle changes can be. There is no substitute.
cw
Lifestyle trumps drugs for a healthy heart
Eating right, exercising can help cut risk of heart problems by 87 percent
By Amanda Beck
Reuters
WASHINGTON - Even men who take medication for high blood pressure or cholesterol can dramatically cut their risk of heart disease by adopting a healthy lifestyle, U.S. researchers reported on Monday.
Middle-aged men on these medications can reduce their chances of heart problems by 57 percent by eating right, not smoking, drinking in moderation and maintaining a healthy weight while exercising regularly, the researchers said.
Those who do not take the drugs can cut their risk of heart ailments by 87 percent if they adopt these lifestyle choices.
"This shows there's no substitute for a healthy lifestyle," said Stephanie Chiuve, lead author of the study to be published in Circulation: Journal of The American Heart Association.
The study tracked 43,000 men between 40 and 75 who were free of diabetes, heart disease and other chronic conditions when the study began in 1986. They completed biannual questionnaires and researchers used the data to tease out correlations between heart disease and lifestyle habits.
The benefits of the healthy habits were apparent even if they were adopted over time.
"In other words, it's never to late to change," said Chiuve. "You can still achieve benefits if you make changes in middle age or later in life."
Men with the lowest risk of heart disease were those who practiced all five healthy habits, but not smoking alone reduced the risk of heart problems by 50 percent, she said.
Comment: While there is controversy on what constitutes a healthy diet, I feel the more you adopt a diet that mimics the Hunter-Gatherer's that have and still do roam the earth, the better of you will be. Also there are alternative approaches to drugs to improve heart disease and type 2 diabetes in those who would prefer taking less drugs.
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Have your nutritional questions answered by e-mail: www.cwiechert.com/QAMAIL.html
Tuesday, July 11, 2006
Vitamin K is in the news - This one will be big...
Vitamin K under trial
7/11/2006- published in the journal Nutrition (Vol. 22, pp. 845-852), Masao Kaneki from Harvard Medical School.
A growing body of science is linking vitamin K to bone health benefits, as well as potential roles in blood clotting and liver cancer. Many questions remain unanswered however and clinical trials are on-going to cast light on these dark areas of vitamin K understanding. The vitamin is less well known than vitamins A to E, but this increasing body of research, as well as increased marketing and advertising from supplement makers, is raising public awareness of vitamin K.
There are two main forms of vitamin K: phylloquinone, also known as phytonadione, (vitamin K1) which is found in green leafy vegetables such as lettuce, broccoli and spinach, and makes up about 90 per cent of the vitamin K in a typical Western diet; and menaquinones (vitamins K2), which make up about 10 per cent of Western vitamin K consumption and can be synthesised in the gut by microflora. A synthetic form of vitamin K, known as K3, does exist but is not recommended for human consumption.
For the most part, research has focussed on the role of vitamin K in boosting bone health. Indeed, a meta-analysis of human clinical trials using MK-4 supplements for bone health (Archives of Internal Medicine, Vol. 166, pp. 1256-1261) reported that supplements (45-milligram daily doses) resulted in reductions in hip fractures of 77 per cent, vertebral fracture of 60 per cent, and all non-vertebral fractures of 81 per cent in elderly people.
Reports of the bone benefits for the other forms of vitamin K, most notably MK-7 from natto, can also be easily found in the literature.
A recent representative cohort study (Journal of Nutrition, Vol. 136, pp. 1323-1328) reported that postmenopausal women with a dietary intake of more than four packets of natto per week (equivalent to about 1400 micrograms of MK-7) reduced bone mass loss at the top of the thighbone (femoral neck) and in the lower arm (radius) by over 80 per cent and 60 per cent, respectively.
The mechanism behind the benefits is proposed to be due to vitamin K’s influence on the secondary modification of osteocalcin, a protein needed to bind calcium to the bone matrix.
Other studies have reported differing results however, like the study from Denmark (Osteoporosis International, Vol. 17, pp. 1122-1132) that reports that vitamin K1 intake had no impact on the bone mineral density and fracture risk of peri-menopausal women.
Evidence is also increasing linking the vitamin to lower risks of atherosclerosis and cancer of the liver. The former is reported to be due to the presence of a vitamin K-dependent protein, MGP, in atherosclerotic plaque. Gene disruption of MGP is said to result in extensive calcification of the aorta.
Comment: Vitamin K1 works just fine, but must be taken in higher amounts than K2. Even newer research is being published lately, that 10 mgs a day of K1 or 1 mg of k2, has the potential to reverse calcium deposits that may exist in the soft tissues of the body like the arteries, or anywhere else it does not belong, and help put it back into the bones, where it does belong.
This may be the most exciting reason to consider taking more of this nutrient or eating large amounts of very green leafy vegetables everyday. I personally take 10 mgs a day, on top of my other supplements for this very purpose.
Vitamin K1
Vitamin K2
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Have your nutritional questions answered by e-mail: www.cwiechert.com/QAMAIL.html
7/11/2006- published in the journal Nutrition (Vol. 22, pp. 845-852), Masao Kaneki from Harvard Medical School.
A growing body of science is linking vitamin K to bone health benefits, as well as potential roles in blood clotting and liver cancer. Many questions remain unanswered however and clinical trials are on-going to cast light on these dark areas of vitamin K understanding. The vitamin is less well known than vitamins A to E, but this increasing body of research, as well as increased marketing and advertising from supplement makers, is raising public awareness of vitamin K.
There are two main forms of vitamin K: phylloquinone, also known as phytonadione, (vitamin K1) which is found in green leafy vegetables such as lettuce, broccoli and spinach, and makes up about 90 per cent of the vitamin K in a typical Western diet; and menaquinones (vitamins K2), which make up about 10 per cent of Western vitamin K consumption and can be synthesised in the gut by microflora. A synthetic form of vitamin K, known as K3, does exist but is not recommended for human consumption.
For the most part, research has focussed on the role of vitamin K in boosting bone health. Indeed, a meta-analysis of human clinical trials using MK-4 supplements for bone health (Archives of Internal Medicine, Vol. 166, pp. 1256-1261) reported that supplements (45-milligram daily doses) resulted in reductions in hip fractures of 77 per cent, vertebral fracture of 60 per cent, and all non-vertebral fractures of 81 per cent in elderly people.
Reports of the bone benefits for the other forms of vitamin K, most notably MK-7 from natto, can also be easily found in the literature.
A recent representative cohort study (Journal of Nutrition, Vol. 136, pp. 1323-1328) reported that postmenopausal women with a dietary intake of more than four packets of natto per week (equivalent to about 1400 micrograms of MK-7) reduced bone mass loss at the top of the thighbone (femoral neck) and in the lower arm (radius) by over 80 per cent and 60 per cent, respectively.
The mechanism behind the benefits is proposed to be due to vitamin K’s influence on the secondary modification of osteocalcin, a protein needed to bind calcium to the bone matrix.
Other studies have reported differing results however, like the study from Denmark (Osteoporosis International, Vol. 17, pp. 1122-1132) that reports that vitamin K1 intake had no impact on the bone mineral density and fracture risk of peri-menopausal women.
Evidence is also increasing linking the vitamin to lower risks of atherosclerosis and cancer of the liver. The former is reported to be due to the presence of a vitamin K-dependent protein, MGP, in atherosclerotic plaque. Gene disruption of MGP is said to result in extensive calcification of the aorta.
Comment: Vitamin K1 works just fine, but must be taken in higher amounts than K2. Even newer research is being published lately, that 10 mgs a day of K1 or 1 mg of k2, has the potential to reverse calcium deposits that may exist in the soft tissues of the body like the arteries, or anywhere else it does not belong, and help put it back into the bones, where it does belong.
This may be the most exciting reason to consider taking more of this nutrient or eating large amounts of very green leafy vegetables everyday. I personally take 10 mgs a day, on top of my other supplements for this very purpose.
Vitamin K1
Vitamin K2
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Have your nutritional questions answered by e-mail: www.cwiechert.com/QAMAIL.html
Saturday, July 08, 2006
Vindication!!! Experts are coming around to increasing minimal Vitamin D levels - Finally
Life Extension Update Exclusive
Review finds current vitamin D recommendations insufficient to achieve healthy blood levels
A review published in the July, 2006 issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition which sought to determine the optimal serum levels of the major circulating form of vitamin D [25(OH)D] for several health outcomes concluded that it would be necessary to consume at least 1000 international units of vitamin D per day to elevate blood serum levels in half the adult population to 75 nanomoles per liter, the minimum level that the researchers found to be advantageous for helping to preserve normal bone mineral density and lower extremity function, and aiding in the prevention of periodontal disease, falls, fractures, and colorectal cancer. Although there is evidence for vitamin D in preventing other diseases such as multiple sclerosis, tuberculosis, insulin resistance, osteoarthritis, hypertension, and cancers other than colorectal cancer, the authors did not include these diseases in the current review.
H. A. Bischoff-Ferrari of Harvard School of Public Health in Boston and University Hospital Zurich in Switzerland, along with colleagues at Harvard and Tufts University evaluated clinical trials and meta-analyses involving vitamin D and each of the selected health outcomes. They concluded that the most desirable serum levels of vitamin D began at 75 nanomoles per liter (30 nanograms per milliliter), and optimal levels are between 90 and 100 nanomoles per liter. These levels cannot be reached by most individuals with the current recommended intakes of 200 international units per day for younger adults and 600 international units per day for older adults. To bring vitamin D concentrations in at least 50 percent of the population up to optimal levels, the authors recommend at least 1000 IU vitamin D per day, and they remark that 2000 IU per day may be a safe recommended daily allowance.
“On the basis of this review, we suggest that, for bone health in younger adults and all outcomes in older adults, including antifracture efficacy, lower-extremity strength, dental health, and colorectal cancer prevention, an increase in the current recommended intake of vitamin D may be warranted,” the authors conclude. “Given the low cost, the safety, and the demonstrated benefit of higher 25(OH)D concentrations, vitamin D supplementation should become a public health priority to combat these common and costly chronic diseases.”
Comment: As many of you know, I have been sharing research for many years, that Vitamin D levels are way too low for most people and that I had increased my intake to 4000 IU per day.
I believe all multi- vitamins should be raised from the normal 400 IU's to at least 1000 IU's to 1200 IU's, and for anyone dealing with chronic diseases, 2000 IU's to 4000 IU's would not be too high.
If you want to increase your levels of D, here is a good source.
NSI Vitamin D3 -- 1,000 IU - 200 Caps
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Have your nutritional questions answered by e-mail: www.cwiechert.com/QAMAIL.html
Review finds current vitamin D recommendations insufficient to achieve healthy blood levels
A review published in the July, 2006 issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition which sought to determine the optimal serum levels of the major circulating form of vitamin D [25(OH)D] for several health outcomes concluded that it would be necessary to consume at least 1000 international units of vitamin D per day to elevate blood serum levels in half the adult population to 75 nanomoles per liter, the minimum level that the researchers found to be advantageous for helping to preserve normal bone mineral density and lower extremity function, and aiding in the prevention of periodontal disease, falls, fractures, and colorectal cancer. Although there is evidence for vitamin D in preventing other diseases such as multiple sclerosis, tuberculosis, insulin resistance, osteoarthritis, hypertension, and cancers other than colorectal cancer, the authors did not include these diseases in the current review.
H. A. Bischoff-Ferrari of Harvard School of Public Health in Boston and University Hospital Zurich in Switzerland, along with colleagues at Harvard and Tufts University evaluated clinical trials and meta-analyses involving vitamin D and each of the selected health outcomes. They concluded that the most desirable serum levels of vitamin D began at 75 nanomoles per liter (30 nanograms per milliliter), and optimal levels are between 90 and 100 nanomoles per liter. These levels cannot be reached by most individuals with the current recommended intakes of 200 international units per day for younger adults and 600 international units per day for older adults. To bring vitamin D concentrations in at least 50 percent of the population up to optimal levels, the authors recommend at least 1000 IU vitamin D per day, and they remark that 2000 IU per day may be a safe recommended daily allowance.
“On the basis of this review, we suggest that, for bone health in younger adults and all outcomes in older adults, including antifracture efficacy, lower-extremity strength, dental health, and colorectal cancer prevention, an increase in the current recommended intake of vitamin D may be warranted,” the authors conclude. “Given the low cost, the safety, and the demonstrated benefit of higher 25(OH)D concentrations, vitamin D supplementation should become a public health priority to combat these common and costly chronic diseases.”
Comment: As many of you know, I have been sharing research for many years, that Vitamin D levels are way too low for most people and that I had increased my intake to 4000 IU per day.
I believe all multi- vitamins should be raised from the normal 400 IU's to at least 1000 IU's to 1200 IU's, and for anyone dealing with chronic diseases, 2000 IU's to 4000 IU's would not be too high.
If you want to increase your levels of D, here is a good source.
NSI Vitamin D3 -- 1,000 IU - 200 Caps
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Have your nutritional questions answered by e-mail: www.cwiechert.com/QAMAIL.html
Wednesday, July 05, 2006
Mushrooms
Mushrooms scored big in antioxidant rankings
29/06/2006- Ingredient suppliers have been quick to tap fruits and vegetables shown to have a high antioxidant content, like tomatoes and broccoli. Now new research suggests that mushrooms deserve a place in the antioxidant hall of fame, with an ORAC value almost on a par with red pepper. After almonds, chocolate, ‘super fruits’ and grapes, mushrooms are the latest food to have the antioxidant spotlight turned on them, as researchers from Penn State University measure the activity of two of the most useful antioxidants in different varieties of edible fungus.
The term antioxidants have entered the consumer consciousness as factors that can help reduce the risk of certain diseases and slow the ageing process by mopping up harmful reactive oxygen species known as free radicals.
Although little attention has been paid to mushrooms to date, according to Dr N Joy Dubost of Penn State, eating a variety of mushrooms alongside other veg can help ensure consumption of a variety of different antioxidants.
For her PhD thesis, Dr Dubost measured the content of two antioxidants - polyphenols and erthiotheneine – in mushrooms using the ORAC assay, the most common antioxidant test, and HPLC instrumentation.
She found that portabella mushrooms had an ORAC value of 9.7 micromoles of trolox equivalents per gram, and crimini mushrooms 9.5.
These scores were just shy of that of red pepper, which has an ORAC value of 10, and streets ahead of carrots and green beans, with a value of 5. Broccoli has an ORAC value of 12.
The results of the study showed that the anti-oxidant effect of mushrooms is primarily down to the polyphenols – but Dubost had previously shown that the fungi also have a high ergothionene content.
“Evidence suggests that ergothionene is biologically very important and, even though the assay does not show it contributes to total antioxidant activity in the mushroom, it may significantly contribute to antioxidant activity in the body,” she said.
Dr Dubost stressed that the ORAC assay, which focuses on the prolific peroxl radical, does not show what actually happens in the human body. But further investigations are underway to see how it could predict physiological activity.
The research was presented at the IFT meeting in Orlando, Florida, this week.
Try - Triple Guard Mushrooms
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Have your nutritional questions answered by e-mail: www.cwiechert.com/QAMAIL.html
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C. is President of Forever Changes, Inc. - a nevada corporation.
29/06/2006- Ingredient suppliers have been quick to tap fruits and vegetables shown to have a high antioxidant content, like tomatoes and broccoli. Now new research suggests that mushrooms deserve a place in the antioxidant hall of fame, with an ORAC value almost on a par with red pepper. After almonds, chocolate, ‘super fruits’ and grapes, mushrooms are the latest food to have the antioxidant spotlight turned on them, as researchers from Penn State University measure the activity of two of the most useful antioxidants in different varieties of edible fungus.
The term antioxidants have entered the consumer consciousness as factors that can help reduce the risk of certain diseases and slow the ageing process by mopping up harmful reactive oxygen species known as free radicals.
Although little attention has been paid to mushrooms to date, according to Dr N Joy Dubost of Penn State, eating a variety of mushrooms alongside other veg can help ensure consumption of a variety of different antioxidants.
For her PhD thesis, Dr Dubost measured the content of two antioxidants - polyphenols and erthiotheneine – in mushrooms using the ORAC assay, the most common antioxidant test, and HPLC instrumentation.
She found that portabella mushrooms had an ORAC value of 9.7 micromoles of trolox equivalents per gram, and crimini mushrooms 9.5.
These scores were just shy of that of red pepper, which has an ORAC value of 10, and streets ahead of carrots and green beans, with a value of 5. Broccoli has an ORAC value of 12.
The results of the study showed that the anti-oxidant effect of mushrooms is primarily down to the polyphenols – but Dubost had previously shown that the fungi also have a high ergothionene content.
“Evidence suggests that ergothionene is biologically very important and, even though the assay does not show it contributes to total antioxidant activity in the mushroom, it may significantly contribute to antioxidant activity in the body,” she said.
Dr Dubost stressed that the ORAC assay, which focuses on the prolific peroxl radical, does not show what actually happens in the human body. But further investigations are underway to see how it could predict physiological activity.
The research was presented at the IFT meeting in Orlando, Florida, this week.
Try - Triple Guard Mushrooms
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Have your nutritional questions answered by e-mail: www.cwiechert.com/QAMAIL.html
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C. is President of Forever Changes, Inc. - a nevada corporation.
Eat your Broccoli, or a hand full of Raw Almonds, your choice...
Antioxidant-rich almonds on a par with fruits and vegetables.
07-01/2006
According to recent research, antioxidant-rich almonds could be the smart choice for people trying to be health-conscious, in a very busy world.
In a new study published last month, almonds, in common with fruit and vegetables, have been found to contain high levels of antioxidants. Antioxidants deactivate free radicals – cell-destroying compounds in the body that can cause heart disease, cancer and strokes.
While almonds have long been recognized as an excellent source of magnesium and vitamin E, comprehensive work had yet to be done on the quantity and quality of their antioxidant content.
Jeffrey Blumberg, director of the Antioxidant Research Laboratory at Tufts University, said:
“ These new findings, coupled with past results, lay the groundwork for future clinical trials that examine a link between whole almond consumption and the reduced risk of heart disease and other chronic conditions.”
By testing the eight most common varieties of California almonds, researchers at Tufts University in California, discovered that the nuts contained 3 very important antioxidants, which are particularly important in fighting the cell damage that can lead to serious illnesses.
The study also claims that one serving of the nut contains the same amount of the antioxidant flavenoid as an equivalent portion of broccoli.
The next stage of the research will focus on determining how the human body extracts and absorbs the beneficial compounds.
In addition to their high antioxidant content, almonds as an effective means of lowering cholesterol.
Previous research has found that the antioxidants and vitamin E in almonds work in tandem – and are more effective when taken in conjunction with each other – to prevent the oxidization of LDL, ‘bad’ cholesterol.
According to the Almond Board of California, around a handful of the nut reduces LDL cholesterol by 4.4% from baseline.
A single ounce of almonds contains 160 calories, calcium, potassium and iron as well as being a good source of protein and fiber.
Today’s research was partly funded by the Almond Board of California and published in the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry.
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Have your nutritional questions answered by e-mail: www.cwiechert.com/QAMAIL.html
07-01/2006
According to recent research, antioxidant-rich almonds could be the smart choice for people trying to be health-conscious, in a very busy world.
In a new study published last month, almonds, in common with fruit and vegetables, have been found to contain high levels of antioxidants. Antioxidants deactivate free radicals – cell-destroying compounds in the body that can cause heart disease, cancer and strokes.
While almonds have long been recognized as an excellent source of magnesium and vitamin E, comprehensive work had yet to be done on the quantity and quality of their antioxidant content.
Jeffrey Blumberg, director of the Antioxidant Research Laboratory at Tufts University, said:
“ These new findings, coupled with past results, lay the groundwork for future clinical trials that examine a link between whole almond consumption and the reduced risk of heart disease and other chronic conditions.”
By testing the eight most common varieties of California almonds, researchers at Tufts University in California, discovered that the nuts contained 3 very important antioxidants, which are particularly important in fighting the cell damage that can lead to serious illnesses.
The study also claims that one serving of the nut contains the same amount of the antioxidant flavenoid as an equivalent portion of broccoli.
The next stage of the research will focus on determining how the human body extracts and absorbs the beneficial compounds.
In addition to their high antioxidant content, almonds as an effective means of lowering cholesterol.
Previous research has found that the antioxidants and vitamin E in almonds work in tandem – and are more effective when taken in conjunction with each other – to prevent the oxidization of LDL, ‘bad’ cholesterol.
According to the Almond Board of California, around a handful of the nut reduces LDL cholesterol by 4.4% from baseline.
A single ounce of almonds contains 160 calories, calcium, potassium and iron as well as being a good source of protein and fiber.
Today’s research was partly funded by the Almond Board of California and published in the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry.
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Have your nutritional questions answered by e-mail: www.cwiechert.com/QAMAIL.html
Sunday, July 02, 2006
Can vitamin C control inflammation and cut heart disease risk?
From The International Health News...
LONDON, UNITED KINGDOM.
Further study on the possible links between vitamin C and ischemic heart disease suggests that vitamin C has antiinflammatory effects and is associated with lower levels of markers for inflammation and hemostasis (blood clotting). Researchers from the Royal Free and University College Medical School gathered data on 3,258 British men aged 60 to 79 years, who were free of heart disease and diabetes. The men's fruit and vegetable and vitamin C intakes were measured using a questionnaire. Results showed that higher vitamin C levels in the blood plasma, higher fruit intake, and higher dietary vitamin C intake were all linked significantly with lower levels of markers of inflammation and hemostasis - specifically C-reactive protein, and tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA) antigen, a marker of endothelial dysfunction (damaging changes to the cells lining the heart and blood vessels). Those in the top quarter for plasma vitamin C had a 44 per cent lower risk of elevated C-reactive protein, and a 21 per cent lower risk of elevated t-PA, compared with the lowest quarter, report the authors. Plasma vitamin C was also inversely linked to fibrinogen concentrations and blood viscosity. The reduction in risk in the highest quarter for fruit intake was 24 per cent for both elevated C-reactive protein and t-PA. Weaker links were found for vegetable intake. Dietary vitamin C was significantly associated with C-reactive protein and t-PA. These results confirm previous findings that plasma and dietary vitamin C levels have are inversely associated with some markers of greater risk of cardiovascular disease among white men. Large randomized trials of the effect of vitamin C supplementation on markers of inflammation and hemostasis would be useful, they conclude. In an accompanying editorial, researchers from the University of California, Davis Medical Center discuss whether vitamin C is an anti-inflammatory agent by considering possible mechanisms behind the effect. They explain that attempts to control inflammation may prove central to the fight against cardiovascular disease, and the antioxidant vitamin C may play a role, although its effects on inflammation remain unclear. They point out several limitations of the UK study, adding that supplementation studies have failed to find reductions in inflammatory markers, and conclude that the effect is far from certain. Wannamethee, S. G. et al. Associations of vitamin C status, fruit and vegetable intakes, and markers of inflammation and hemostasis. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 83, March 2006, pp. 567-74 Jialal, I. and Singh, U. Is vitamin C an antiinflammatory agent? American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 83, March 2006, pp. 525-26
See Linus Paulings views on what Vitamin C can do...
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Have your nutritional questions answered by e-mail: www.cwiechert.com/QAMAIL.html
LONDON, UNITED KINGDOM.
Further study on the possible links between vitamin C and ischemic heart disease suggests that vitamin C has antiinflammatory effects and is associated with lower levels of markers for inflammation and hemostasis (blood clotting). Researchers from the Royal Free and University College Medical School gathered data on 3,258 British men aged 60 to 79 years, who were free of heart disease and diabetes. The men's fruit and vegetable and vitamin C intakes were measured using a questionnaire. Results showed that higher vitamin C levels in the blood plasma, higher fruit intake, and higher dietary vitamin C intake were all linked significantly with lower levels of markers of inflammation and hemostasis - specifically C-reactive protein, and tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA) antigen, a marker of endothelial dysfunction (damaging changes to the cells lining the heart and blood vessels). Those in the top quarter for plasma vitamin C had a 44 per cent lower risk of elevated C-reactive protein, and a 21 per cent lower risk of elevated t-PA, compared with the lowest quarter, report the authors. Plasma vitamin C was also inversely linked to fibrinogen concentrations and blood viscosity. The reduction in risk in the highest quarter for fruit intake was 24 per cent for both elevated C-reactive protein and t-PA. Weaker links were found for vegetable intake. Dietary vitamin C was significantly associated with C-reactive protein and t-PA. These results confirm previous findings that plasma and dietary vitamin C levels have are inversely associated with some markers of greater risk of cardiovascular disease among white men. Large randomized trials of the effect of vitamin C supplementation on markers of inflammation and hemostasis would be useful, they conclude. In an accompanying editorial, researchers from the University of California, Davis Medical Center discuss whether vitamin C is an anti-inflammatory agent by considering possible mechanisms behind the effect. They explain that attempts to control inflammation may prove central to the fight against cardiovascular disease, and the antioxidant vitamin C may play a role, although its effects on inflammation remain unclear. They point out several limitations of the UK study, adding that supplementation studies have failed to find reductions in inflammatory markers, and conclude that the effect is far from certain. Wannamethee, S. G. et al. Associations of vitamin C status, fruit and vegetable intakes, and markers of inflammation and hemostasis. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 83, March 2006, pp. 567-74 Jialal, I. and Singh, U. Is vitamin C an antiinflammatory agent? American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 83, March 2006, pp. 525-26
See Linus Paulings views on what Vitamin C can do...
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Have your nutritional questions answered by e-mail: www.cwiechert.com/QAMAIL.html
Wednesday, June 28, 2006
Osteoporosis Myth: More Calcium Means Better Protection
This is a reprint from an e-mail I got from a group of health professionals world wide who share information, that I am a participant with. CW
Conventional medicine has told you that you need to take 1,500 mg of calcium every day to fight osteoporosis. I've told my readers in the past that they don't really need more than 1,000 mg per day. But now there's evidence that you can take even less. In fact, you probably don't need to take any more than you'd find in a quality multivitamin. A recent study looked at 310 participants from the very far north country of Iceland. The subjects were divided into groups based on how much calcium they consumed daily. Then the researchers measured the participants' vitamin D and parathyroid hormone (PTH) levels.PTH, which is made by your tiny parathyroid glands, is critical for keeping just the right amount of calcium in your blood at all times. If you're not getting enough calcium absorbed from our food, your glands will secret PTH. PTH draws calcium from your bones to keep up proper blood levels. The result is osteoporosis. Your goal is to keep a low level of PTH as you age. The easiest way to keep your PTH level low is to keep your vitamin D level high. Vitamin D helps your body absorb calcium into your blood stream. This keeps PTH levels low and prevents calcium loss from your bones.How well does vitamin D protect your bones? The researchers concluded that Icelanders (who get very little winter sun, a major source of vitamin D) with the highest levels of vitamin D don't need more than 800 mg daily of calcium. (I suspect people who live in more southern areas don't even need that much.) Based on this conclusion, the authors suggested that low levels of vitamin D over a long period of time might be your biggest risk of osteoporosis. So you might not need supplemental calcium (other than what you get in a good multivitamin) as long as you have plenty of vitamin D. I think vitamin D is one of the most valuable nutrients available. Not only does it prevent osteoporosis, but it also prevents cancer and heart disease. It's one nutrient everyone needs. Before you start taking vitamin D, though, ask your doctor to measure your 25-hydroxy vitamin D level. I routinely use this test to measure vitamin D and have done so for years.It should be a staple lab test, just like cholesterol. I want my patients to be in the upper third (over 55.0 ng/ml) of the normal range (16.0 to 74.0 ng/ml). If you're not there, consider supplemental vitamin D - up to 5,000 units daily in capsules or from cod liver oil.Some doctors will tell you that level is toxic. It's not! Most of the information you'll hear about vitamin D toxicity is hogwash.If you were in the tropics, the sun would give you up to 10,000 units daily. As long as you don't burn, that's the best way to get your vitamin D - it won't cost you a thing!
Yours for better health and medical freedom,
Robert Jay Rowen, MD
Comment: This is just another educated oppinion that agrees that taking a product like Tums to make sure your protected from Osteoporosis, is worthless. Make sure your getting plenty of Magnesium and Vitamin D instead of just focusing on Calcium.
NSI - Calcium, Magnesium & Vitamin D
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Have your nutritional questions answered by e-mail: www.cwiechert.com/QAMAIL.html
Conventional medicine has told you that you need to take 1,500 mg of calcium every day to fight osteoporosis. I've told my readers in the past that they don't really need more than 1,000 mg per day. But now there's evidence that you can take even less. In fact, you probably don't need to take any more than you'd find in a quality multivitamin. A recent study looked at 310 participants from the very far north country of Iceland. The subjects were divided into groups based on how much calcium they consumed daily. Then the researchers measured the participants' vitamin D and parathyroid hormone (PTH) levels.PTH, which is made by your tiny parathyroid glands, is critical for keeping just the right amount of calcium in your blood at all times. If you're not getting enough calcium absorbed from our food, your glands will secret PTH. PTH draws calcium from your bones to keep up proper blood levels. The result is osteoporosis. Your goal is to keep a low level of PTH as you age. The easiest way to keep your PTH level low is to keep your vitamin D level high. Vitamin D helps your body absorb calcium into your blood stream. This keeps PTH levels low and prevents calcium loss from your bones.How well does vitamin D protect your bones? The researchers concluded that Icelanders (who get very little winter sun, a major source of vitamin D) with the highest levels of vitamin D don't need more than 800 mg daily of calcium. (I suspect people who live in more southern areas don't even need that much.) Based on this conclusion, the authors suggested that low levels of vitamin D over a long period of time might be your biggest risk of osteoporosis. So you might not need supplemental calcium (other than what you get in a good multivitamin) as long as you have plenty of vitamin D. I think vitamin D is one of the most valuable nutrients available. Not only does it prevent osteoporosis, but it also prevents cancer and heart disease. It's one nutrient everyone needs. Before you start taking vitamin D, though, ask your doctor to measure your 25-hydroxy vitamin D level. I routinely use this test to measure vitamin D and have done so for years.It should be a staple lab test, just like cholesterol. I want my patients to be in the upper third (over 55.0 ng/ml) of the normal range (16.0 to 74.0 ng/ml). If you're not there, consider supplemental vitamin D - up to 5,000 units daily in capsules or from cod liver oil.Some doctors will tell you that level is toxic. It's not! Most of the information you'll hear about vitamin D toxicity is hogwash.If you were in the tropics, the sun would give you up to 10,000 units daily. As long as you don't burn, that's the best way to get your vitamin D - it won't cost you a thing!
Yours for better health and medical freedom,
Robert Jay Rowen, MD
Comment: This is just another educated oppinion that agrees that taking a product like Tums to make sure your protected from Osteoporosis, is worthless. Make sure your getting plenty of Magnesium and Vitamin D instead of just focusing on Calcium.
NSI - Calcium, Magnesium & Vitamin D
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Have your nutritional questions answered by e-mail: www.cwiechert.com/QAMAIL.html
Monday, June 26, 2006
Low-carb diet benefits obese type 2 diabetics
Low-carb diet benefits obese type 2 diabetics
By Megan RauscherFri Jun 23, 6:00 PM ET
In motivated people who are overweight and have type 2 diabetes, a low-carbohydrate diet with some caloric restriction has lasting benefits on body weight and blood sugar control, Swedish researchers report.
Dr. Jorgen Vesti Nielsen and Dr. Eva A. Joensson from Blekingesjukhuset, Karlshamn, previously reported that 16 obese patients with type 2 diabetes who followed a low carbohydrate diet achieved significantly better diabetes control and body weight over 6 months than did 15 patients who followed their usual diet.
Follow-up data at 22 months for the low-carbohydrate group now show "stable improvement" of body weight and glucose control, the investigators report in the journal Nutrition and Metabolism. (The publication is open access, available subscription-free at www.nutritionandmetabolism.com/home).
At the start of the study, the average body weight of the participants was 100.6 kg in the low-carbohydrate group. At 6 months, they were down to 89.2 kg, and by 22 months they were at 92.0 kg.
Moreover, hemoglobin A1c, an indicator of ongoing blood glucose control, dropped from 8.0 percent in the low-carbohydrate group to 7.0 percent after a year, and at 22 months it was still down, at 6.9 percent.
The low-carbohydrate and high-carbohydrate diet contained about the same amount of calories (1800 kcal for men and 1600 kcal for women), but the proportions of carbohydrates, protein, and fat were different: 20 percent, 30 percent, and 50 percent, respectively, for the low-carb diet versus 55-60 percent, 15 percent, and 25-30 percent, respectively, for the higher-carb control diet.
In comments to Reuters Health, Nielsen said: "There is no such thing as one diet that all patients should adapt to. Some prefer to eat as they are used to and treat the blood glucose with medications. Others are willing to make quite substantial changes in their lives in order to get healthier (and in some cases to get cured of their diabetes)."
When it comes to diet and diabetes, Nielsen acknowledges that "we know very little and patients should be informed about our lack of knowledge so they can make their own choices. And then they should get our full support in whatever they choose."
SOURCE: Nutrition and Metabolism 2006.
Comment: Notice that the low carb diet had only 20% carbs and 50% fats, protein was about the same level. Also, I like the admission that the Doctor admits that when it comes to diet and diabetes, they don't have much knowledge. And, did he use the CURE word with dietary changes, I think he did.
Learn all you need to know here...
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Have your nutritional questions answered by e-mail: www.cwiechert.com/QAMAIL.html
By Megan RauscherFri Jun 23, 6:00 PM ET
In motivated people who are overweight and have type 2 diabetes, a low-carbohydrate diet with some caloric restriction has lasting benefits on body weight and blood sugar control, Swedish researchers report.
Dr. Jorgen Vesti Nielsen and Dr. Eva A. Joensson from Blekingesjukhuset, Karlshamn, previously reported that 16 obese patients with type 2 diabetes who followed a low carbohydrate diet achieved significantly better diabetes control and body weight over 6 months than did 15 patients who followed their usual diet.
Follow-up data at 22 months for the low-carbohydrate group now show "stable improvement" of body weight and glucose control, the investigators report in the journal Nutrition and Metabolism. (The publication is open access, available subscription-free at www.nutritionandmetabolism.com/home).
At the start of the study, the average body weight of the participants was 100.6 kg in the low-carbohydrate group. At 6 months, they were down to 89.2 kg, and by 22 months they were at 92.0 kg.
Moreover, hemoglobin A1c, an indicator of ongoing blood glucose control, dropped from 8.0 percent in the low-carbohydrate group to 7.0 percent after a year, and at 22 months it was still down, at 6.9 percent.
The low-carbohydrate and high-carbohydrate diet contained about the same amount of calories (1800 kcal for men and 1600 kcal for women), but the proportions of carbohydrates, protein, and fat were different: 20 percent, 30 percent, and 50 percent, respectively, for the low-carb diet versus 55-60 percent, 15 percent, and 25-30 percent, respectively, for the higher-carb control diet.
In comments to Reuters Health, Nielsen said: "There is no such thing as one diet that all patients should adapt to. Some prefer to eat as they are used to and treat the blood glucose with medications. Others are willing to make quite substantial changes in their lives in order to get healthier (and in some cases to get cured of their diabetes)."
When it comes to diet and diabetes, Nielsen acknowledges that "we know very little and patients should be informed about our lack of knowledge so they can make their own choices. And then they should get our full support in whatever they choose."
SOURCE: Nutrition and Metabolism 2006.
Comment: Notice that the low carb diet had only 20% carbs and 50% fats, protein was about the same level. Also, I like the admission that the Doctor admits that when it comes to diet and diabetes, they don't have much knowledge. And, did he use the CURE word with dietary changes, I think he did.
Learn all you need to know here...
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Have your nutritional questions answered by e-mail: www.cwiechert.com/QAMAIL.html
Sunday, June 25, 2006
Flourless Peanut Butter Cookies - That taste great and are low glycemic...
Sometimes people think I do not like sweets or treats, but this is not the case, I just believe we are being overwhelmed with sugar and high glycemic foods and that we are becoming very sick as a country, because of it. So, today I thought I would just send you a treat to bake with the kids and to enjoy. These are fine for Diabetics and people with Metabolic Syndrome.
Flourless Peanut Butter Cookies
INGREDIENTS: For 6 servings...
1 cup peanut butter plain or crunchy
1 cup Splenda
1 slightly beaten large egg
1/8 Teas of Vanilla Ext.
DIRECTIONS:
Heat oven to 350 degrees.
Mix peanut butter and sugar until creamy.
Beat egg & add to peanut butter mixture. Mix well.
Drop by teaspoonfuls onto ungreased baking sheet, 2" apart.
Dip a fork in Splenda and make a criss-cross pattern on the cookies.
Bake until slightly browned, but still soft to the touch, about 10 minutes.
Don't over cook or they will be crumbly.
Let cool on cookie sheet for 2 minutes.
Transfer to wire rack until cooled.
Enjoy...
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Have your nutritional questions answered by e-mail: www.cwiechert.com/QAMAIL.html
Flourless Peanut Butter Cookies
INGREDIENTS: For 6 servings...
1 cup peanut butter plain or crunchy
1 cup Splenda
1 slightly beaten large egg
1/8 Teas of Vanilla Ext.
DIRECTIONS:
Heat oven to 350 degrees.
Mix peanut butter and sugar until creamy.
Beat egg & add to peanut butter mixture. Mix well.
Drop by teaspoonfuls onto ungreased baking sheet, 2" apart.
Dip a fork in Splenda and make a criss-cross pattern on the cookies.
Bake until slightly browned, but still soft to the touch, about 10 minutes.
Don't over cook or they will be crumbly.
Let cool on cookie sheet for 2 minutes.
Transfer to wire rack until cooled.
Enjoy...
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Have your nutritional questions answered by e-mail: www.cwiechert.com/QAMAIL.html
Tuesday, June 20, 2006
Heart Association urges trans fats limit, but still doesn't understand saturated fats...
Heart Association urges trans fats limit
By MARILYNN MARCHIONE, AP Medical WriterMon Jun 19, 7:43 PM ET
The American Heart Association has become the first big health group to urge a specific limit on trans fats in the diet — less than 1 percent of total calories — in new guidelines released Monday.
Also for the first time, the organization's dietary guidelines include lifestyle recommendations, including an emphasis on getting exercise and not smoking.
A panel of specialists in nutrition and heart disease reviewed more than 90 studies to update the dietary advice the association released in 2000. The guidelines are for healthy Americans ages 2 and older.
Rather than slavishly counting calories and grams of fat, people should try something simpler: getting in the habit of cooking with healthier oils, and balancing calories consumed with calories burned through exercise, said Alice Lichtenstein, a Tufts University nutrition expert who chaired the guidelines panel.
Trans fats, or trans fatty acids such as partially hydrogenated oils, are in many cookies, crackers, breads, cakes, French fries and other fried foods. They contribute to heart disease risk by raising LDL, or the bad cholesterol.
Avoiding them and keeping a healthy diet is challenging while eating out as much as Americans do, panel members noted.
Last week, a consumer group sued KFC to try to get the company to stop frying its chicken in trans fats, and other fast-food chains have been pressured to lower such fats as well.
"Total fat reduction alone is not the only answer. It is important what kind of fat you eat," said Linda Van Horn, a Northwestern University dietitian who helped draft the guidelines.
Among the panel's other recommendations:
_Limiting saturated fats to no more than 7 percent of daily calories, down from the 10 percent formerly recommended and the 11 percent most Americans consume. Saturated fats are in meat and dairy products, and in coconut and palm oil.
_Getting at least half an hour of exercise a day.
_Eating fruits and vegetables (not fruit juices) that are deep in color, such as spinach, carrots, peaches and berries.
_Choosing whole-grain, high-fiber foods.
_Eating fish, especially oily fish like salmon and trout, at least twice a week. (Children and pregnant women should follow federal guidelines for avoiding mercury in fish.)
_Choosing lean meats and trying vegetable alternatives.
_Consuming fat-free and 1 percent fat milk and other dairy products.
_Minimizing calories from beverages and avoiding ones with added sugars.
_Adding little or no salt to foods.
_Drinking alcohol in moderation.
Comment: These guidelines are very good overall. They are beginning to understand why fruit juices are not good, but they still fear saturated fats. Here is the global view of fats, which eventually, they will figure out, I hope. The Truth Aout Fats.
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Have your nutritional questions answered by e-mail: www.cwiechert.com/QAMAIL.html
By MARILYNN MARCHIONE, AP Medical WriterMon Jun 19, 7:43 PM ET
The American Heart Association has become the first big health group to urge a specific limit on trans fats in the diet — less than 1 percent of total calories — in new guidelines released Monday.
Also for the first time, the organization's dietary guidelines include lifestyle recommendations, including an emphasis on getting exercise and not smoking.
A panel of specialists in nutrition and heart disease reviewed more than 90 studies to update the dietary advice the association released in 2000. The guidelines are for healthy Americans ages 2 and older.
Rather than slavishly counting calories and grams of fat, people should try something simpler: getting in the habit of cooking with healthier oils, and balancing calories consumed with calories burned through exercise, said Alice Lichtenstein, a Tufts University nutrition expert who chaired the guidelines panel.
Trans fats, or trans fatty acids such as partially hydrogenated oils, are in many cookies, crackers, breads, cakes, French fries and other fried foods. They contribute to heart disease risk by raising LDL, or the bad cholesterol.
Avoiding them and keeping a healthy diet is challenging while eating out as much as Americans do, panel members noted.
Last week, a consumer group sued KFC to try to get the company to stop frying its chicken in trans fats, and other fast-food chains have been pressured to lower such fats as well.
"Total fat reduction alone is not the only answer. It is important what kind of fat you eat," said Linda Van Horn, a Northwestern University dietitian who helped draft the guidelines.
Among the panel's other recommendations:
_Limiting saturated fats to no more than 7 percent of daily calories, down from the 10 percent formerly recommended and the 11 percent most Americans consume. Saturated fats are in meat and dairy products, and in coconut and palm oil.
_Getting at least half an hour of exercise a day.
_Eating fruits and vegetables (not fruit juices) that are deep in color, such as spinach, carrots, peaches and berries.
_Choosing whole-grain, high-fiber foods.
_Eating fish, especially oily fish like salmon and trout, at least twice a week. (Children and pregnant women should follow federal guidelines for avoiding mercury in fish.)
_Choosing lean meats and trying vegetable alternatives.
_Consuming fat-free and 1 percent fat milk and other dairy products.
_Minimizing calories from beverages and avoiding ones with added sugars.
_Adding little or no salt to foods.
_Drinking alcohol in moderation.
Comment: These guidelines are very good overall. They are beginning to understand why fruit juices are not good, but they still fear saturated fats. Here is the global view of fats, which eventually, they will figure out, I hope. The Truth Aout Fats.
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Have your nutritional questions answered by e-mail: www.cwiechert.com/QAMAIL.html
Saturday, June 17, 2006
Restricting calories and carbohydrates may prevent Alzheimer's disease...
Life Extension Update Exclusive
Mechanism defined for calorie restriction's preventive benefit in Alzheimer's disease...
A report that will appear in the July, 2006 issue of the Journal of Biological Chemistry contributes evidence to the hypothesis that restricting calories and carbohydrates may prevent Alzheimer's disease by stimulating longevity-associated molecular mechanisms in the brain.
Professor of Psychiatry and Neuroscience and Director of the Mt Sinai School of Medicine's Neuroinflammation Research Center Giulio Maria Pasinetti, MD, PhD, and colleagues administered a low calorie, low carbohydrate diet to mice and observed a reduction in amyloid beta peptides, which lead to the formation of plaques in the brains of Alzheimer's disease patients. Other mice given higher calorie, high fat diets experienced an increase in the peptides. The reduction in amyloid beta occurring in the calorie restricted mice coincided with an increase in brain levels of SIRT1, a member of a family of proteins called sirtuins that are associated with longevity. SIRT1 may initiate the activation of alpha-secretase, an enzyme that can inhibit the generation of amyloid beta. Dr Pasinetti told Life Extension, “When we expressed SIRT1 in brain cells [in vitro] that produce beta amyloid, we found that SIRT1 expression prevented beta amyloid generation.”
"Both clinical and epidemiological evidence suggests that modification of lifestyle factors such as nutrition may prove crucial to Alzheimer's disease management," Dr Pasinetti stated. "This research, however, is the first to show a connection between nutrition and Alzheimer's Disease neuropathy by defining mechanistic pathways in the brain and scrutinizing biochemical functions. We hope these findings further unlock the mystery of Alzheimer's and bring hope to the millions of Americans suffering from this disease."
http://www.lef.org/newsletter/2006/2006_06_17.htm
Comment: Is it possible that The HealthPointe Program could help reverse Alzheimer's Disease? Well, HealthPointe reduces both calories and carbohydrates in your daily diet, so I would say yes, according to this and many other studies.
HealthPointe
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Have your nutritional questions answered by e-mail: www.cwiechert.com/QAMAIL.html
Mechanism defined for calorie restriction's preventive benefit in Alzheimer's disease...
A report that will appear in the July, 2006 issue of the Journal of Biological Chemistry contributes evidence to the hypothesis that restricting calories and carbohydrates may prevent Alzheimer's disease by stimulating longevity-associated molecular mechanisms in the brain.
Professor of Psychiatry and Neuroscience and Director of the Mt Sinai School of Medicine's Neuroinflammation Research Center Giulio Maria Pasinetti, MD, PhD, and colleagues administered a low calorie, low carbohydrate diet to mice and observed a reduction in amyloid beta peptides, which lead to the formation of plaques in the brains of Alzheimer's disease patients. Other mice given higher calorie, high fat diets experienced an increase in the peptides. The reduction in amyloid beta occurring in the calorie restricted mice coincided with an increase in brain levels of SIRT1, a member of a family of proteins called sirtuins that are associated with longevity. SIRT1 may initiate the activation of alpha-secretase, an enzyme that can inhibit the generation of amyloid beta. Dr Pasinetti told Life Extension, “When we expressed SIRT1 in brain cells [in vitro] that produce beta amyloid, we found that SIRT1 expression prevented beta amyloid generation.”
"Both clinical and epidemiological evidence suggests that modification of lifestyle factors such as nutrition may prove crucial to Alzheimer's disease management," Dr Pasinetti stated. "This research, however, is the first to show a connection between nutrition and Alzheimer's Disease neuropathy by defining mechanistic pathways in the brain and scrutinizing biochemical functions. We hope these findings further unlock the mystery of Alzheimer's and bring hope to the millions of Americans suffering from this disease."
http://www.lef.org/newsletter/2006/2006_06_17.htm
Comment: Is it possible that The HealthPointe Program could help reverse Alzheimer's Disease? Well, HealthPointe reduces both calories and carbohydrates in your daily diet, so I would say yes, according to this and many other studies.
HealthPointe
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Have your nutritional questions answered by e-mail: www.cwiechert.com/QAMAIL.html
Tuesday, June 06, 2006
Zinc deficiency not High Cholesterol, may cause Atherosclerosis...
Atherosclerosis is the process whereby fatty substances such as cholesterol and calcium form plaque on the inner lining of an artery, causing them to harden. If enough builds up the plaque can reduce blood flow through the artery, and if it ruptures blood clots can form, which can block the flow of blood to the heart and cause a heart attack.
Atherosclerosis occurs naturally in humans as part of the aging process, but certain factors including high blood cholesterol, smoking, high blood pressure, obesity and diabetes increase the risk.
A report last year in the Journal of Nutrition (Vol. 135, pp. 2114-2118) reported that a zinc deficiency in mice was associated with an increase in the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) through inflammation and a decreased level of compounds that protect against atherosclerosis.
The new research reports that supplementation of a high cholesterol diet with zinc reduced the formation of lesions in the arteries of rabbits, but the effects were not linked to changes in cholesterol levels.
The National University of Singapore divided 18 white rabbits into three groups. The first was fed a normal diet (control), the second fed a high-cholesterol diet (HCD, one per cent cholesterol), and the third was fed the HCD diet but was supplemented with zinc in the carbonate form (0.1 per cent).
After eight weeks, the researchers measured blood levels of HDL, LDL, and total cholesterol, as well as triglyceride levels. The number of white and red blood cells were also measured.
The researchers found that zinc supplementation did not significantly change total cholesterol, LDL, or triglyceride levels, but a significant decrease in HDL levels was observed – 6.9 millimoles per litre in the HCD group and 2.6 millimoles per litre in the HCD plus zinc group.
This result appears to agree with last years report that zinc deficiency is associated with increased levels of HDL.
When the scientists investigated the formation of lesions in the rabbit aorta. They found that zinc supplementation significantly decreased the area of the lesions by 66 per cent, a result linked to a decrease in iron concentrations in the tissue, which has previously been reported to catalytically promote damaging free-radical reactions and the development of atherosclerosis.
Comment: This study shows that High Cholesterol is not what causes damage to the arteries, but high iron levels that create free radical damage, that zinc apparently removes or modifies so that damage is reduced.
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Have your nutritional questions answered by e-mail: www.cwiechert.com/QAMAIL.html
Atherosclerosis occurs naturally in humans as part of the aging process, but certain factors including high blood cholesterol, smoking, high blood pressure, obesity and diabetes increase the risk.
A report last year in the Journal of Nutrition (Vol. 135, pp. 2114-2118) reported that a zinc deficiency in mice was associated with an increase in the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) through inflammation and a decreased level of compounds that protect against atherosclerosis.
The new research reports that supplementation of a high cholesterol diet with zinc reduced the formation of lesions in the arteries of rabbits, but the effects were not linked to changes in cholesterol levels.
The National University of Singapore divided 18 white rabbits into three groups. The first was fed a normal diet (control), the second fed a high-cholesterol diet (HCD, one per cent cholesterol), and the third was fed the HCD diet but was supplemented with zinc in the carbonate form (0.1 per cent).
After eight weeks, the researchers measured blood levels of HDL, LDL, and total cholesterol, as well as triglyceride levels. The number of white and red blood cells were also measured.
The researchers found that zinc supplementation did not significantly change total cholesterol, LDL, or triglyceride levels, but a significant decrease in HDL levels was observed – 6.9 millimoles per litre in the HCD group and 2.6 millimoles per litre in the HCD plus zinc group.
This result appears to agree with last years report that zinc deficiency is associated with increased levels of HDL.
When the scientists investigated the formation of lesions in the rabbit aorta. They found that zinc supplementation significantly decreased the area of the lesions by 66 per cent, a result linked to a decrease in iron concentrations in the tissue, which has previously been reported to catalytically promote damaging free-radical reactions and the development of atherosclerosis.
Comment: This study shows that High Cholesterol is not what causes damage to the arteries, but high iron levels that create free radical damage, that zinc apparently removes or modifies so that damage is reduced.
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Have your nutritional questions answered by e-mail: www.cwiechert.com/QAMAIL.html
Saturday, June 03, 2006
The right supplements work better than drugs, without the side effects...
In Defense of Vitamins and Supplements!
By Allen S. Josephs, M.D.President, Vitacost.com 06/02/2006
There was recently a panel conference of the National Institutes of Health which concluded that Americans may be taking too many vitamin supplements without any clear benefit. Although I would agree that certainly not every vitamin study or vitamin out of hundreds of thousands has shown benefit, there have been countless numbers of studies in the last decade that provide convincing evidence for the overall merit of quality vitamin/multi-nutrient supplementation. This week's newsletter is going to be a primer concerning some of the more notable human studies that have been published in peer-review prominent and reputable medical journals in the last decade regarding the benefits of supplementation. I do agree many mass market vitamins are worthless but high quality supplements with the correct nutrients, form and levels are truly life-saving and enhancing based on the evidence. Get ready for an eye-opening newsletter. The first nutrient I would like to discuss is selenium, a micro-mineral that until the 1970s was not even known to be essential to life. In December 1996, the journal JAMA published the results of a multi-center, double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled cancer-prevention trial. Seven clinics throughout the United States participated with 1312 patients. Patients were randomized to receive either 200 mcg a day of selenomethionine or placebo. Patients were treated on average for 4.5 years. It was found that in the selenium-treated group there was an overall reduction in the incidence of cancer of 37% with a reduction in overall cancer mortality of 50%. There was a decrease incidence in lung cancer of 38%, colorectal cancer of 46% and a 63% reduction in prostate cancer. If this had been a drug, I am confident that the FDA would have fast-tracked it and approved it as a preventative medicine for cancer. But being that it was just a simple mineral, medical academia looked at it as merely a curiosity to be further investigated. There was a subsequent study published in 1998 in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute measuring selenium concentrations in the toenails of over 50,000 physicians who were followed for more than a decade. It was found that those men with the highest concentrations of selenium reduced their risk of advanced prostate cancer by about two-thirds. Sadly the typical multivitamin contains the wrong form and only 20 mcg per day. I strongly recommend people read the labels of the supplements they take and make sure 200 mcg of selenomethionine is included. The next essential nutrients that I would like to discuss are omega-3 fatty acids EPA & DHA, with the best source being molecularly distilled fish oil. For those of you who are regular readers of this newsletter, you know how strongly I feel about the amazing benefits of fish oil. For the NIH panel not to indicate the importance of this in their recent news release is quite sad. In the April 2005 edition of the Archives of Internal Medicine, there was a review article published regarding the benefits of lipid-lowering drugs such as the statins and various diets. I had previously written about this study. Just to recap, almost 11,000 clinical trials that were done in the last 40 years were reviewed. Of these almost 11,000 studies, 97 were randomized and controlled with reliable mortality data. These 97 trials involved over 275,000 people. When they looked at these studies that utilized the statin drugs, such as Zocor, Lipitor and others, it was found that overall mortality was decreased by 13%. However, when they reviewed the studies using omega-3 fatty acids (placebo-controlled) they found that this nutrient decreased mortality by 23%, almost twice as powerful as the statin drugs and obviously without any side effects or the outrageously high cost of statin drugs. In fact, for those that would like to understand and solve our health care crisis that is bankrupting America and its citizens, I strongly recommend you read my new book called Natural Cures from a Real Medical Doctor. Clearly the NIH is not going to solve any health care issues with their current advice. Omega-3 fatty acids appear to work their magic by improving heart rhythm and decreasing clotting in the heart, leading to a significant decrease in the incidence in sudden death. The omega-3 fatty acids also have shown benefits in clinical trials as anti-inflammatory agents with great results in arthritis patients. It can also be of benefit in patients with depression. In fact I believe ADHD in children and adults can be helped with a low sugar diet combined with B-complex vitamins and fish oil.Let's go on to coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10). This has become an increasingly popular nutrient utilized by people to help improve cardiac function and periodontal disease. In fact, it is approved in Japan for the treatment of heart failure. As a neurologist, I was extremely pleased to see a study published in the October 2002 edition of Archives of Neurology regarding Parkinson's disease. Eighty patients with early Parkinson's disease participated in a double-blinded, randomized, multi-center study. Patients were randomly assigned to receive CoQ10 at doses of 300 mg, 600 mg, 1200 mg a day or placebo. It was found that the higher the dose of CoQ10, the slower the progression of Parkinson's disease. In fact at the highest dosage the progression was reduced by an amazing 50%. The study concluded that CoQ10 was safe and well tolerated and that it appeared to slow the progressive deterioration of function in Parkinson patients. I am aware that there are neurologists in New York using up to 3,000 mg a day of CoQ10 in clinical trials. I routinely recommend this nutrient to my patients with Parkinson's disease since there is no effective FDA approved drug that can slow the progression of Parkinson's disease.Another disease that I deal with on a regular basis is stroke. It is said that stroke increases the risk of subsequent hip fracture anywhere from two to four times. There has been discussion in the medical literature that elevations in homocysteine are not only a risk factor for stroke, but also for osteoporotic fractures in the elderly. There was a study published in the March 2005 edition of JAMA involving 628 consecutive patients 65 years or older with residual stroke of at least one year's duration. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 5 mg of folic acid along with 1,500 mcg of B12 versus placebo. After two years, those patients treated with the high dose of folic acid and B12 had a reduction in plasma homocysteine level by 38% versus the placebo group that had an increase in homocysteine level of 31%. What was most fascinating was that the number of hip fractures was only 10 in the folic/B12 group and 43 in the placebo group. This result was highly statistically significant with the likelihood that this result could have occurred by chance of less than 1 in a 1,000. Where was the NIH group regarding the results of this study? There have been other studies in the medical literature pointing to the benefits of folic acid in reducing incidence of tumors in the colon, etc. I must reiterate that your typical multivitamin will not provide these results because the level of B vitamins is too low. Read your labels and choose carefully. The NIH should have pointed this out rather than disparaging all vitamins regardless of their formulations. The NIH panel did mention in passing the AREDS (age-related eye disease study). This was published about five years ago in the medical literature. It was a multi-center study that followed over 3,500 patients with varying degrees of age-related macular degeneration. Groups were assigned to receive placebo, zinc or zinc and anti-oxidants. The anti-oxidant/zinc formulation consisted of 500 mg of vitamin C, 400 units of vitamin E, 15 mg of beta carotene, 80 mg of zinc and 2 mg of copper. It was found that those patients treated with the high dose antioxidants and zinc reduced the risk of developing advanced age-related macular degeneration by about 25%. I must point out the NIH failed to mention the published study on Medline regarding 10 mg lutein, 10 mg lutein plus antioxidants (NSI's OcuPower) or placebo in 90 patients conduced by the U.S. Veteran's Administration. Vitacost/NSI helped fund this study and it is the first published study in humans to show improvement in vision with nutrients whereas the placebo failed. I am not aware of any drug, laser, surgery or medical treatment that can provide the same benefit. The NIH panel spoke primarily of the zinc, although it was clearly the zinc and the antioxidants that had the most benefit. Another one of my favorite nutrients is called acetyl-L carnitine (ALCAR). There was a study published many years ago using this nutrient along with alpha lipoic acid. It was found that these nutrients were actually able to regenerate brain cells in aging rats to the point that they were able to function at a much higher level. In the journal Diabetes Care (2005), researchers from Wayne State University evaluated two one-year placebo-controlled trials regarding diabetic peripheral neuropathy. These trials involved the use of acetyl-L carnitine, either 1,500 mg or 3,000 mg a day. Over 1,000 patients were involved in the studies. The two studies were evaluated separately and then combined. Patients underwent biopsy of sural nerves along with other testing to determine efficacy. It was found that those patients treated with ALCAR showed significant improvement in sural nerve fiber number and regenerating nerve fiber clusters. Pain which has the most bothersome symptom showed significant improvement in one study and in the combined cohort. It was concluded that these studies demonstrated that ALCAR treatment is efficacious in alleviating symptoms, particularly pain and improving nerve fiber regeneration in patients with established diabetic neuropathy. Do you know how many drugs are available to help regenerate peripheral nerves in patients with diabetic neuropathy? The answer is ZERO. Where was the NIH panel looking at this nutrient? There have been other recent studies with ALCAR showing benefit for men with impaired sperm motility. I have used ALCAR successfully in my multiple sclerosis patients who suffer with chronic fatigue. There have been double-blinded trials in the medical literature demonstrating efficacy for this problem. There have been studies in the medical literature looking at acetyl-L carnitine in patients with Alzheimer's disease. In one study published in Neurology (September 2000), it was found that patients treated for one year with 1,000 mg three times daily seemed to show stabilization whereas the placebo group showed further decline.Another great nutrient that is in the category of bioflavonoids is green tea. Green tea catechins have been shown in animal and lab studies to inhibit cancer growth. There was a study published in the journal Cancer Research (January 2006) looking at men with high-grade prostate intraepithelial neoplasia. Recent studies have shown that 30% of men with this condition go on to develop prostate cancer within one year. In this study, 60 patients with prostate intraepithelial neoplasia were enrolled in a double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial. Half of the men were given 600 mg of standardized green tea extract daily whereas the other group was given placebo. After one year, only one tumor was diagnosed in the 30 men treated with green tea (incidence of about 3%) whereas 9 cancers were found among the 30 placebo-treated men (incidence of 30%). As a side observation, those men treated with green tea extract also had reduced lower urinary tract symptoms, suggesting that these compounds may also be of value with benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH). Green tea has been used anecdotally for its potential cancer fighting properties. In an article just published in the June 2006 edition of Leukemia Research, researchers out of the Mayo Clinic reported on four patients with low-grade B cell malignancies, three of which had a partial response after taking green tea extract. The researchers cautioned against widespread use of green tea until further clinical trials can be conducted to define optimal dosing, schedule, toxicity and clinical efficacy. This is absurd considering the fact green tea is safe and has been consumed for thousands of years. We are not talking about a new drug that may kill you. Make sure you read the label and look for green tea that has a high percentage of EGCG, the most active component. Another nutrient in the bioflavonoid family is curcumin. This powerful nutrient is also being tested in centers throughout the country, including MD Anderson in Texas, for killing cancer cells. Lycopene is a nutrient in the carotenoid family. There are approximately 600 carotenoids in nature, the best well-known one being beta carotene. There have been some interesting studies on lycopene regarding cancer and heart disease. In one study, 54 patients with biopsy-proven, metastatic prostatic cancer were randomized to undergo orchidectomy (removal of testicles) alone or orchidectomy plus lycopene supplementation. After six months, both groups showed a significant decrease in the levels of PSA but the group treated with orchidectomy and lycopene showed further decrease. After two years, the changes were noted to be more consistent in the orchidectomy/lycopene group. Approximately 40% of the patients treated with surgery alone had a complete PSA response compared with 78% in the group treated with surgery and lycopene. The researchers concluded that adding lycopene to orchidectomy produced a more reliably consistent decrease in serum PSA level, treating not only the primary tumor, but also diminishing secondary tumors. In another study published in the journal Experimental of Biology Medicine (November 2002), 26 men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer were randomly assigned to receive 30 mg a day of lycopene extract or no supplementation for three weeks before radical prostate surgery. It was found at the time of surgery those men treated with the lycopene had generally smaller tumors compared to those given no therapy. The researchers indicated that this pilot study suggested that lycopene may have beneficial effects in prostate cancer and suggested a larger clinical trial. I would like to point out the primary standardized supplement utilized in many studies is Lyc-O-Mato. This rather lengthy newsletter was just an introduction into some of the amazing studies on vitamins/nutrients that have been published in recent years. This newsletter, literally, just scratches the surface as I did not cover other important nutrients such as magnesium, vitamin D, calcium, glucosamine/chondroitin, garlic and so on. Recent studies on vitamin D indicate it can help maintain balance and reduce cancer, heart disease and osteoporosis. Current RDA/DV levels of 400 IU per day are too low; scientists are suggesting 700 to 2,000 IU per day is optimal. Glucosamine sulfate and chondroitin sulfate have numerous studies proving their benefits for repairing joints and reversing arthritis in humans. Calcium and magnesium may prevent and reverse osteoporosis and even heart disease.
Comment: Why the news media and medical journals don't make this kind of news front page statis is beyond me, but it might have something to do with profit.
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Have your nutritional questions answered by e-mail: www.cwiechert.com/QAMAIL.html
By Allen S. Josephs, M.D.President, Vitacost.com 06/02/2006
There was recently a panel conference of the National Institutes of Health which concluded that Americans may be taking too many vitamin supplements without any clear benefit. Although I would agree that certainly not every vitamin study or vitamin out of hundreds of thousands has shown benefit, there have been countless numbers of studies in the last decade that provide convincing evidence for the overall merit of quality vitamin/multi-nutrient supplementation. This week's newsletter is going to be a primer concerning some of the more notable human studies that have been published in peer-review prominent and reputable medical journals in the last decade regarding the benefits of supplementation. I do agree many mass market vitamins are worthless but high quality supplements with the correct nutrients, form and levels are truly life-saving and enhancing based on the evidence. Get ready for an eye-opening newsletter. The first nutrient I would like to discuss is selenium, a micro-mineral that until the 1970s was not even known to be essential to life. In December 1996, the journal JAMA published the results of a multi-center, double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled cancer-prevention trial. Seven clinics throughout the United States participated with 1312 patients. Patients were randomized to receive either 200 mcg a day of selenomethionine or placebo. Patients were treated on average for 4.5 years. It was found that in the selenium-treated group there was an overall reduction in the incidence of cancer of 37% with a reduction in overall cancer mortality of 50%. There was a decrease incidence in lung cancer of 38%, colorectal cancer of 46% and a 63% reduction in prostate cancer. If this had been a drug, I am confident that the FDA would have fast-tracked it and approved it as a preventative medicine for cancer. But being that it was just a simple mineral, medical academia looked at it as merely a curiosity to be further investigated. There was a subsequent study published in 1998 in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute measuring selenium concentrations in the toenails of over 50,000 physicians who were followed for more than a decade. It was found that those men with the highest concentrations of selenium reduced their risk of advanced prostate cancer by about two-thirds. Sadly the typical multivitamin contains the wrong form and only 20 mcg per day. I strongly recommend people read the labels of the supplements they take and make sure 200 mcg of selenomethionine is included. The next essential nutrients that I would like to discuss are omega-3 fatty acids EPA & DHA, with the best source being molecularly distilled fish oil. For those of you who are regular readers of this newsletter, you know how strongly I feel about the amazing benefits of fish oil. For the NIH panel not to indicate the importance of this in their recent news release is quite sad. In the April 2005 edition of the Archives of Internal Medicine, there was a review article published regarding the benefits of lipid-lowering drugs such as the statins and various diets. I had previously written about this study. Just to recap, almost 11,000 clinical trials that were done in the last 40 years were reviewed. Of these almost 11,000 studies, 97 were randomized and controlled with reliable mortality data. These 97 trials involved over 275,000 people. When they looked at these studies that utilized the statin drugs, such as Zocor, Lipitor and others, it was found that overall mortality was decreased by 13%. However, when they reviewed the studies using omega-3 fatty acids (placebo-controlled) they found that this nutrient decreased mortality by 23%, almost twice as powerful as the statin drugs and obviously without any side effects or the outrageously high cost of statin drugs. In fact, for those that would like to understand and solve our health care crisis that is bankrupting America and its citizens, I strongly recommend you read my new book called Natural Cures from a Real Medical Doctor. Clearly the NIH is not going to solve any health care issues with their current advice. Omega-3 fatty acids appear to work their magic by improving heart rhythm and decreasing clotting in the heart, leading to a significant decrease in the incidence in sudden death. The omega-3 fatty acids also have shown benefits in clinical trials as anti-inflammatory agents with great results in arthritis patients. It can also be of benefit in patients with depression. In fact I believe ADHD in children and adults can be helped with a low sugar diet combined with B-complex vitamins and fish oil.Let's go on to coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10). This has become an increasingly popular nutrient utilized by people to help improve cardiac function and periodontal disease. In fact, it is approved in Japan for the treatment of heart failure. As a neurologist, I was extremely pleased to see a study published in the October 2002 edition of Archives of Neurology regarding Parkinson's disease. Eighty patients with early Parkinson's disease participated in a double-blinded, randomized, multi-center study. Patients were randomly assigned to receive CoQ10 at doses of 300 mg, 600 mg, 1200 mg a day or placebo. It was found that the higher the dose of CoQ10, the slower the progression of Parkinson's disease. In fact at the highest dosage the progression was reduced by an amazing 50%. The study concluded that CoQ10 was safe and well tolerated and that it appeared to slow the progressive deterioration of function in Parkinson patients. I am aware that there are neurologists in New York using up to 3,000 mg a day of CoQ10 in clinical trials. I routinely recommend this nutrient to my patients with Parkinson's disease since there is no effective FDA approved drug that can slow the progression of Parkinson's disease.Another disease that I deal with on a regular basis is stroke. It is said that stroke increases the risk of subsequent hip fracture anywhere from two to four times. There has been discussion in the medical literature that elevations in homocysteine are not only a risk factor for stroke, but also for osteoporotic fractures in the elderly. There was a study published in the March 2005 edition of JAMA involving 628 consecutive patients 65 years or older with residual stroke of at least one year's duration. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 5 mg of folic acid along with 1,500 mcg of B12 versus placebo. After two years, those patients treated with the high dose of folic acid and B12 had a reduction in plasma homocysteine level by 38% versus the placebo group that had an increase in homocysteine level of 31%. What was most fascinating was that the number of hip fractures was only 10 in the folic/B12 group and 43 in the placebo group. This result was highly statistically significant with the likelihood that this result could have occurred by chance of less than 1 in a 1,000. Where was the NIH group regarding the results of this study? There have been other studies in the medical literature pointing to the benefits of folic acid in reducing incidence of tumors in the colon, etc. I must reiterate that your typical multivitamin will not provide these results because the level of B vitamins is too low. Read your labels and choose carefully. The NIH should have pointed this out rather than disparaging all vitamins regardless of their formulations. The NIH panel did mention in passing the AREDS (age-related eye disease study). This was published about five years ago in the medical literature. It was a multi-center study that followed over 3,500 patients with varying degrees of age-related macular degeneration. Groups were assigned to receive placebo, zinc or zinc and anti-oxidants. The anti-oxidant/zinc formulation consisted of 500 mg of vitamin C, 400 units of vitamin E, 15 mg of beta carotene, 80 mg of zinc and 2 mg of copper. It was found that those patients treated with the high dose antioxidants and zinc reduced the risk of developing advanced age-related macular degeneration by about 25%. I must point out the NIH failed to mention the published study on Medline regarding 10 mg lutein, 10 mg lutein plus antioxidants (NSI's OcuPower) or placebo in 90 patients conduced by the U.S. Veteran's Administration. Vitacost/NSI helped fund this study and it is the first published study in humans to show improvement in vision with nutrients whereas the placebo failed. I am not aware of any drug, laser, surgery or medical treatment that can provide the same benefit. The NIH panel spoke primarily of the zinc, although it was clearly the zinc and the antioxidants that had the most benefit. Another one of my favorite nutrients is called acetyl-L carnitine (ALCAR). There was a study published many years ago using this nutrient along with alpha lipoic acid. It was found that these nutrients were actually able to regenerate brain cells in aging rats to the point that they were able to function at a much higher level. In the journal Diabetes Care (2005), researchers from Wayne State University evaluated two one-year placebo-controlled trials regarding diabetic peripheral neuropathy. These trials involved the use of acetyl-L carnitine, either 1,500 mg or 3,000 mg a day. Over 1,000 patients were involved in the studies. The two studies were evaluated separately and then combined. Patients underwent biopsy of sural nerves along with other testing to determine efficacy. It was found that those patients treated with ALCAR showed significant improvement in sural nerve fiber number and regenerating nerve fiber clusters. Pain which has the most bothersome symptom showed significant improvement in one study and in the combined cohort. It was concluded that these studies demonstrated that ALCAR treatment is efficacious in alleviating symptoms, particularly pain and improving nerve fiber regeneration in patients with established diabetic neuropathy. Do you know how many drugs are available to help regenerate peripheral nerves in patients with diabetic neuropathy? The answer is ZERO. Where was the NIH panel looking at this nutrient? There have been other recent studies with ALCAR showing benefit for men with impaired sperm motility. I have used ALCAR successfully in my multiple sclerosis patients who suffer with chronic fatigue. There have been double-blinded trials in the medical literature demonstrating efficacy for this problem. There have been studies in the medical literature looking at acetyl-L carnitine in patients with Alzheimer's disease. In one study published in Neurology (September 2000), it was found that patients treated for one year with 1,000 mg three times daily seemed to show stabilization whereas the placebo group showed further decline.Another great nutrient that is in the category of bioflavonoids is green tea. Green tea catechins have been shown in animal and lab studies to inhibit cancer growth. There was a study published in the journal Cancer Research (January 2006) looking at men with high-grade prostate intraepithelial neoplasia. Recent studies have shown that 30% of men with this condition go on to develop prostate cancer within one year. In this study, 60 patients with prostate intraepithelial neoplasia were enrolled in a double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial. Half of the men were given 600 mg of standardized green tea extract daily whereas the other group was given placebo. After one year, only one tumor was diagnosed in the 30 men treated with green tea (incidence of about 3%) whereas 9 cancers were found among the 30 placebo-treated men (incidence of 30%). As a side observation, those men treated with green tea extract also had reduced lower urinary tract symptoms, suggesting that these compounds may also be of value with benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH). Green tea has been used anecdotally for its potential cancer fighting properties. In an article just published in the June 2006 edition of Leukemia Research, researchers out of the Mayo Clinic reported on four patients with low-grade B cell malignancies, three of which had a partial response after taking green tea extract. The researchers cautioned against widespread use of green tea until further clinical trials can be conducted to define optimal dosing, schedule, toxicity and clinical efficacy. This is absurd considering the fact green tea is safe and has been consumed for thousands of years. We are not talking about a new drug that may kill you. Make sure you read the label and look for green tea that has a high percentage of EGCG, the most active component. Another nutrient in the bioflavonoid family is curcumin. This powerful nutrient is also being tested in centers throughout the country, including MD Anderson in Texas, for killing cancer cells. Lycopene is a nutrient in the carotenoid family. There are approximately 600 carotenoids in nature, the best well-known one being beta carotene. There have been some interesting studies on lycopene regarding cancer and heart disease. In one study, 54 patients with biopsy-proven, metastatic prostatic cancer were randomized to undergo orchidectomy (removal of testicles) alone or orchidectomy plus lycopene supplementation. After six months, both groups showed a significant decrease in the levels of PSA but the group treated with orchidectomy and lycopene showed further decrease. After two years, the changes were noted to be more consistent in the orchidectomy/lycopene group. Approximately 40% of the patients treated with surgery alone had a complete PSA response compared with 78% in the group treated with surgery and lycopene. The researchers concluded that adding lycopene to orchidectomy produced a more reliably consistent decrease in serum PSA level, treating not only the primary tumor, but also diminishing secondary tumors. In another study published in the journal Experimental of Biology Medicine (November 2002), 26 men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer were randomly assigned to receive 30 mg a day of lycopene extract or no supplementation for three weeks before radical prostate surgery. It was found at the time of surgery those men treated with the lycopene had generally smaller tumors compared to those given no therapy. The researchers indicated that this pilot study suggested that lycopene may have beneficial effects in prostate cancer and suggested a larger clinical trial. I would like to point out the primary standardized supplement utilized in many studies is Lyc-O-Mato. This rather lengthy newsletter was just an introduction into some of the amazing studies on vitamins/nutrients that have been published in recent years. This newsletter, literally, just scratches the surface as I did not cover other important nutrients such as magnesium, vitamin D, calcium, glucosamine/chondroitin, garlic and so on. Recent studies on vitamin D indicate it can help maintain balance and reduce cancer, heart disease and osteoporosis. Current RDA/DV levels of 400 IU per day are too low; scientists are suggesting 700 to 2,000 IU per day is optimal. Glucosamine sulfate and chondroitin sulfate have numerous studies proving their benefits for repairing joints and reversing arthritis in humans. Calcium and magnesium may prevent and reverse osteoporosis and even heart disease.
Comment: Why the news media and medical journals don't make this kind of news front page statis is beyond me, but it might have something to do with profit.
Christopher Wiechert, C.N.C.
Christopher Wiechert's Healthblogger is for educational or informational purposes only, and is not intended to diagnose or provide treatment for any condition. If you have any concerns about your own health, you should always consult with a healthcare professional. If you decide to use this information on your own, it's your constitutional right, but I assume no responsibility.
Visit our website at: www.cwiechert.com
Have your nutritional questions answered by e-mail: www.cwiechert.com/QAMAIL.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)