Sunday, December 30, 2012
Saturday, December 29, 2012
Wednesday, September 5, 2012
Importance of your gut flora
By Dr. Mercola
There are 100 trillion cells in your body, but 90% of the genetic material is not yours. It is from the bacteria, fungi, viruses and other microorganisms, i.e. your microflora. Gut microbes are big in the news lately, as researchers continue to discover the important roles these tiny organisms play in your overall health and well-being. We now know that your microflora influence your:
Genetic expression
Immune system
Weight, and
Risk of numerous chronic and acute diseases, from diabetes to cancer
Most recently, research has shown that a certain set of these microbes may actually influence the activity of genes in your brain – and the parts they play are not small parts. They may work to manipulate your behavior, and your memory as well.
Microbes Manipulate Your Mind
According to a recent article in The Guardian1, certain species of gut bacteria have been found to influence gene activity in your brain. Some of this research was published in 2011.2 Mice lacking gut bacteria were found to engage in "high-risk behavior," and this altered behavior was accompanied by neurochemical changes in the mouse brain.
According to the authors, microbiota (your gut flora) may play a role in the communication between your gut and your brain, and:
"Acquisition of intestinal microbiota in the immediate postnatal period has a defining impact on the development and function of the gastrointestinal, immune, neuroendocrine and metabolic systems. For example, the presence of gut microbiota regulates the set point for hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis activity."
But they also discovered other differences between the mice with normal gut flora and those lacking gut bacteria. When examining the animals' brains, they discovered a number of genetic alterations in the germ-free mice. According to The Guardian:
"Brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) was significantly up-regulated, and the 5HT1A serotonin receptor sub-type down-regulated, in the dentate gyrus of the hippocampus. The gene encoding the NR2B subunit of the NMDA receptor was also down-regulated in the amygdala.
All three genes have previously been implicated in emotion and anxiety-like behaviors.
BDNF is a growth factor that is essential for proper brain development, and a recent study showed that deleting the BDNF receptor TrkB alters the way in which newborn neurons integrate into hippocampal circuitry and increases anxiety-like behaviors in mice. Serotonin receptors, which are distributed widely throughout the brain, are well known to be involved in mood, and compounds that activate the 5HT1A subtype also produce anxiety-like behaviors.
The finding that the NR2B subunit of the NMDA receptor down-regulated in the amygdala is particularly interesting. NMDA receptors are composed of multiple subunits, but those made up of only NR2B subunits are known to be critical for the development and function of the amygdala, which has a well established role in fear and other emotions, and in learning and memory. Drugs that block these receptors have been shown to block the formation of fearful memories and to reduce the anxiety associated with alcohol withdrawal in rodents."
Your Gut Bacteria Are Under Constant Assault
Your lifestyle can and does influence your gut flora on a daily basis. For example, your gut bacteria are extremely sensitive to:
Antibiotics
Chlorinated water
Antibacterial soap
Agricultural chemicals
Pollution
All of these common exposures can wreak havoc on the makeup of bacteria in your gut, but researchers are now increasingly looking at the cascading ill effects of antibiotics in particular.
Not only are antibiotics overused in medicine, the vast majority of these drugs enter you via livestock – you consume antibiotics every time you eat meat from an animal raised in a confined animal feeding operation (CAFO). In fact, about 80 percent of all the antibiotics produced are used in agriculture3 – not only to fight infection, but to promote unhealthy (though profitable) weight gain in the animals.
Early Use of Antibiotics Also Linked to Obesity
With that in mind, is it any wonder that researchers are now finding that antibiotics are associated with weight gain in humans as well?
"For many years now, farmers have known that antibiotics are great at producing heavier cows for market," Dr. Jan Blustein, MD, PhD, professor of population health and medicine told PreventDisease.com in a recent article.4 "While we need more research to confirm our findings, this carefully conducted study suggests that antibiotics influence weight gain in humans, and especially children..."
According to The Washington Post:5
"The use of antibiotics in young children might lead to a higher risk of obesity, and two new studies, one on mice and one on humans, conclude that changes of the intestinal bacteria caused by antibiotics could be responsible. Taken together, the New York University researchers conclude that it might be necessary to broaden our concept of the causes of obesity and urge more caution in using antibiotics."
The first study, published in the journal Nature6, found that young mice treated with low doses of common antibiotics gained 10-15 percent more fat than the untreated controls. After surveying the gut bacteria in the mice, they found that mice treated with antibiotics had a different composition of gut bacteria compared to the untreated mice. Specifically, certain species of bacteria previously shown to be associated with obesity were found in higher concentrations in the treated mice. Furthermore, after genetic analysis of the bacteria's metabolism, they discovered that genes responsible for fat synthesis had greater levels of activity in the treated mice.
According to lead author Martin Blaser:7
"The rise of obesity around the world is coincident with widespread antibiotic use, and our studies provide an experimental linkage. It is possible that early exposure to antibiotics primes children for obesity later in life."
The co-author Dr Ilseung Cho added:8
"By using antibiotics, we found we can actually manipulate the population of bacteria and alter how they metabolize certain nutrients. Ultimately, we were able to affect body composition and development in young mice by changing their gut microbiome through this exposure."
The second study, published in the International Journal of Obesity9, aimed to corroborate these findings in human subjects. The study, which included more than 10,000 children, found that treating babies with antibiotics before the age of six months old appears to predispose them to being overweight in childhood. Children exposed to antibiotics between the ages of six to 14 months did not have significantly higher body mass than unexposed children.
While this study does not prove causation between antibiotic use in infancy and later obesity, it does show a correlation, and the mechanism appears to be related to the way antibiotics alter your child's gut flora. However, excess weight is not the only, or the worst problem that such imbalance can create. As previously explained by Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride, children with imbalanced gut flora are more prone to develop neurological disorders, such as ADD/ADHD and various learning disorders. These children are also more prone to vaccine damage.
Total Video Length: 1:13:21
Download Interview Transcript
Prebiotics Research Highlighted at American Chemical Society Meeting
Increasingly, researchers are finding that proper nutrition is not just about getting the right kind and amount of nutrients needed for biological processes. You also need to nourish these non-human cells in your body, i.e. your gut microflora. This issue was recently raised at the 244th National Meeting & Exposition of the American Chemical Society. According to a recent article in NewHope360:10
"'Just as people need food to thrive, so do the billions of healthful bacteria that live in our guts, our gastrointestinal tract,' [Robert] Rastall [Phd] explained. 'There's a large and expanding body of scientific evidence that bacteria in the gut play a role in health and disease. Prebiotics are foods that contain nutrients that support the growth and activity of these friendly bacteria.'
Rastall contrasted prebiotics to the more familiar probiotics, already being promoted on the labels of food like yogurt and some dietary supplements.
Probiotic foods actually contain friendly bacteria like Lactobacillus acidophilus believed to release healthful substances as they grow in the GI tract. Prebiotics are indigestible food ingredients that provide no nutrition to people. Their purpose is to nourish the friendly bacteria among the estimated 100 trillion microbes living inside the human GI tract."
While raised awareness about the importance of prebiotics and probiotics is good news, it comes with the territory that researchers are also working on ways to produce prebiotics that can easily be added to processed foods. Pre- and probiotics are very sensitive to heat, and excessive heat-treatment is a hallmark of most processed foods. It therefore stands to reason that any prebiotic inventions they come up with for the processed foods market will inevitably be of inferior quality, and I strongly recommend avoiding any and all processed foods that proclaim to contain prebiotics or probiotics, and stick with the real thing, i.e. traditionally fermented foods for healthful probiotics, and unprocessed whole foods for prebiotics, such as onions and garlic.
Study Finds "Clear Link" Between Inflammation, Bacterial Communities and Cancer
Demonstrating just how far-reaching the health impact of the bacterial balance in your gut can be, another recent study claims the key factor behind cancer appears to be ecological rather than genetic.11
Published in the journal Science12, the study suggests cancer may be due to a chain reaction that starts with inflammation that disrupts your gut ecosystems, allowing pathogens, such as E.coli, to invade your gut and cause cellular damage. The presence of E.coli was increased by a factor of 100 by inflammation, and 80 percent of germ-free mice infected with E.coli developed colorectal cancer, while germ-free mice inoculated with another common gut bacterium remained cancer-free, although these mice, like the others, did develop severe colitis (gut inflammation).
According to a press release by the University of North Carolina:13
"In a series of experiments conducted with mice prone to intestinal inflammation, the researchers found that inflammation itself causes significant simplification in diverse communities of gut microbes and allows new bacterial populations to establish major footholds. Among the bacterial taxa invading the disturbed intestinal ecosystem, the research team found a greatly increased presence of E. coli and related bacteria.
By putting E. coli bacteria into mice that were raised under sterile conditions, the team also found that the presence of E. coli promoted tumor formation. When regions of the E. coli genome known to be involved in DNA damage were removed, the ability of the E. coli to cause tumors was substantially decreased.
The researchers noted that the mouse results may have implications for human health as well, as they also found an E. coli variant with the suspect genes in high percentages of human patients with colorectal cancer and irritable bowel disease.
...'As is usual in human studies, we didn't have cause and effect,' Fodor noted. 'We don't know if microbes are somehow causing conditions to shift in the gut that would cause cancer or if there are conditions that are associated with cancer that would increase the openness of the gut to particular microbes. A shift in the microbial community is associated with inflammation... It is interesting that the microbial community is actually changing with the disease state, which indicates that it is either responding to or contributing to the disease state.'"
Like Bacteria, Cancer Cells Rely on Communication and Cooperation
In related news, an article published in Trends in Microbiology14 examines the shared traits of cancer cells and bacteria. Bacteria and cancer cells both use sophisticated communication to gain supremacy within the host. As reported by Medical News Today:15
"Inspired by the social and survival tactics of bacteria, the team presents a new picture of cancer as a meta-community of smart communicating cells possessing special traits for cooperative behavior. Using intricate communication, cancer cells can distribute tasks, share resources, differentiate, and make decisions. Before sending cells to colonize organs and tissues throughout the body (metastasis), 'spying cells' explore the body and return the cancer's origin. Only then do metastatic cells leave the primary tumor and navigate to new posts.
Also like bacteria, cancer cells change their own environment. They induce genetic changes and enslave surrounding normal cells, forcing them to do the disease's bidding - providing physical support, protecting them from the immune system, and more."
Three years ago, I posted a TED video featuring Bonnie Bassler, in which she discusses how bacteria "talk" to each other using a chemical language that lets them coordinate defense and mount attacks. Cancer cells, as it turns out, employ similar forms of communication, and as discussed by Bassler, these discoveries pave the way for the development of drugs aimed at shutting down or altering cell-to-cell communication.
This is a Flash-based video and may not be viewable on mobile devices.
According to Medical News Today:
"The team also suggests further research into cancer 'cannibalism,' when cancer cells may consume their peers when they run out of resources. The idea is to send signals which trigger cancer cells to kill each other, which can be done with bacteria. Other researchers have demonstrated that injected bacteria can 'outsmart cancer.' Bacteria can be used to induce gap junctions between the cancer cells and immune cells, 'teaching' the immune system to recognize and kill the tumor cells."
The Phenomenal Health Benefits of Fermented Vegetables
Cultured or fermented foods have a very long history in virtually all native diets, and have always been highly prized for their health benefits. The advent of processed foods dramatically altered the human diet, and we're now reaping the results in the form of rapidly rising chronic health problems. I believe the shunning of traditionally fermented foods has a lot to do with this.
The culturing process produces beneficial microbes that are extremely important for your health as they help balance your intestinal flora. If you do not regularly consume the traditionally fermented foods below, a high-quality probiotic supplement will provide similar benefits:
Fermented vegetables
Lassi (an Indian yoghurt drink, traditionally enjoyed before dinner)
Fermented milk, such as kefir (a quart of unpasteurized kefir has far more active bacteria than you can possibly purchase in any probiotics supplement)
Natto (fermented soy)
When choosing fermented foods, steer clear of pasteurized versions, as pasteurization will destroy many of the naturally occurring probiotics. This includes most of the "probiotic" yogurts you find in every grocery store these days; since they're pasteurized, they will be associated with all of the problems of pasteurized milk products and they typically contain added sugars, high fructose corn syrup, artificial coloring, or artificial sweeteners, all of which will only worsen your health.
Fermented foods are also some of the best chelators and detox agents available, meaning they can help rid your body of a wide variety of toxins, including heavy metals.
When you first start out, you'll want to start small, adding as little as half a tablespoon of fermented vegetables to each meal, and gradually working your way up to about a quarter to half a cup (2 oz to 4 oz) of fermented vegetables or other cultured food with one to three meals per day. Since cultured foods are efficient detoxifiers, you may experience detox symptoms, or a "healing crisis," if you introduce too many at once.
Learn to Make Your Own Fermented Vegetables
Fermented vegetables are easy to make on your own. It's also the most cost-effective way to get high amounts of healthful probiotics in your diet. To learn how, review the following interview with Caroline Barringer, a Nutritional Therapy Practitioner (NTP) and an expert in the preparation of the foods prescribed in Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride's Gut and Psychology Syndrome (GAPS) Nutritional Program. In addition to the wealth of information shared in this interview, I highly recommend getting the book Gut and Psychology Syndrome, which provides all the necessary details for Dr. McBride's GAPS protocol.
Although you can use the native bacteria on cabbage and other vegetables, it is typically easier to get consistent results by using a starter culture. Caroline prepares hundreds of quarts of fermented vegetables a week and has found that she gets great results by using three to four high quality probiotic capsules to jump start the fermentation process.
Download Interview Transcript
Caroline prepares the vegetables commercially and I used hers for a month before I started making my own. So, if you just want to put your toe in the water and see if you like them, you can order a jar or two and try them out. You can find her products on www.CulturedVegetables.net or www.CulturedNutrition.com.
AVOID This to Optimize Your Gut Flora!
Along with eating naturally fermented foods and/or taking a high-quality supplement, it's essential that you avoid sugar, including fructose. Sugar nourishes pathogenic bacteria, yeast, and fungi in your gut, which may actually harm you more than its impact on insulin resistance. One of the major results of eating a healthy diet like the one described in my nutrition plan is that you cause your beneficial gut bacteria to flourish, and they secondarily perform the real "magic" of restoring your health.
Remember, an estimated 80 percent of your immune system is located in your gut, which is just one more reason why "tending to" your gut microflora is an essential element of good health. A robust immune system, supported by your flourishing inner ecosystem, is your number one defense against ALL disease, from the common cold to cancer.
I feel very strongly that if we can catalyze a movement to get more people to implement this ancient dietary wisdom to their normal eating patterns, then we'll start seeing a radical change in health.
Friday, August 3, 2012
Obesity Surpasses Smoking in Terms of Ill Health Effects
By Dr. Mercola
This may come as a surprise to some, but data collected from over 60,000 Canadians show that obesity leads to more doctor visits than smoking.
The idea that being overweight can be worse for your health than smoking is likely to make many balk, considering how "normal" it has become to carry around extra pounds, but in terms of overall health effects and subsequent health care costs, it's likely true.
The study estimates that if obesity were not a factor, doctor visits in Canada would decrease by 10 percent. The decrease would be even greater if you take into account problems related to type 2 diabetes, which is also directly related to obesity and poor diet.
With the obesity epidemic putting pressure on health care systems everywhere, this news may trigger financial penalties or incentives to get people to lose weight, according to Medical News Today [1].
"Just as smokers have higher life insurance premiums, people who are obese could also be made to pay more for health insurance. The complication is that obesity tends to be more prevalent among people with low income, making this solution difficult to implement," Medical News Today said.
... "The fact that obesity is more serious than smoking helps people understand the gravity of the problem because they already have some kind of intuitive understanding of how bad smoking is," says [lead researcher, James] McIntosh.
Excess Weight is a Gateway to Chronic Disease
Canadian and American obesity statistics are neck-to-neck, with about one-quarter to one third of adults in the obese category. A staggering two-thirds of Americans are overweight. This does indeed place a heavy burden on the health care system. It's important to realize that a large number of diseases are directly attributable to obesity, including:
Diabetes Polycystic ovarian syndrome Urinary incontinence Pickwickian syndrome
Cancer Gastro-esophageal reflux disease Chronic renal failure Depression
Congestive heart failure Fatty liver disease Lymph edema Osteoarthritis
Enlarged heart Hernia Cellulitis Gout
Pulmonary embolism Erectile dysfunction Stroke Gallbladder disease
Most Adults and Teens Not Exercising and at High Risk of Disease
Physical activity and good health go hand-in-hand. The problem is most adults and teens aren't physically active enough to stay healthy and maintain ideal weight. According to a series in the journal Lancet on physical activity and health, not exercising is leaving around a third of adults (1.5 billion people) and 4 out of 5 adolescents at a 20-30 percent greater risk of diabetes, heart disease, and some types of cancer.
Reported by Medical News Today [2]:
"Investigations revealed that the recommended activities, known as moderate-intensity activities, like walking for 30 minutes at least 5 times a week, or running for 20 minutes 3 times a week, is not being done by approximately 3 out of 10 adults worldwide."
Worse yet, an estimated 80 percent of 13 to 15 year olds are not getting the recommended one hour per day of physical activity! According to one of the Lancet reports [3], lack of exercise causes as many as 1 in 10 premature deaths around the world each year — roughly as many as smoking...
Too Much TV Linked with Thicker, Weaker Kids
There can be little doubt that our modern lifestyle is at the heart of the problem. We eat poorly and don't exercise enough. The results of this sedentary, under-nourished lifestyle are evident in today's children. Today, one-third of all American children ages 2-19 are overweight or obese. Most of these children will become diabetic.
Spending hours in front of the TV or playing video games is of course a hallmark of a sedentary lifestyle.
If you needed any more proof that too much time in front of the TV is not good for kids, then you'll be interested in a new study that not only affirms that TV-time is linked to sleep problems and weight problems, but also to weaker muscles [4]. The new study, published in the International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity [5], shows that the number of hours in front of the TV during preschool years is linked to increased waist size and decreased leg strength.
According to the authors:
"Watching television excessively in early childhood may eventually compromise muscular fitness and waist circumference in children as they approach pubertal age."
This is significant, the study's authors said, because it not only could affect performance in sports activities, but also cardiovascular health and susceptibility to injuries. TV programming also expose your children to commercials promoting health-harming junk foods; literally programming them from infancy to have a skewed understanding of what to eat. Just as you don't want your child exposed to ads for cigarettes during Saturday morning cartoons, neither should your kids be bombarded by non-stop commercials for sugary foods and snacks.
Tips for Raising Healthy Weight Children
If you have children who are overweight or obese, I highly suggest you pick up a copy of my book Generation XL, which is packed with tools to transform the health of your children. In the meantime, I would recommend getting started on these crucial lifestyle changes right now:
Set strict viewing limits for TV, computer and video games
Make exercise a part of your family's daily schedule. Remember, children model your behavior more than anything else
Get rid of the junk food and sweetened drinks
Set family meal times and prepare home-cooked meals for your family
Reward your children with kind words, not food
Where Americans Spend Grocery Money, 1982 vs. Today
Overall, about 90 percent of the money Americans spend on food is spent on processed foods [6]. This includes restaurant foods (i.e. food away from home) and processed grocery foods that require little or no preparation time before consuming.
When looking at the ratio of money spent on store-bought groceries only, Americans spend nearly a fourth of their grocery money on processed foods and sweets—twice as much as they did in 1982—according to Department of Labor statistics [7]. Pricing of meats, sugar, and flour has had a great influence our spending habits. These items have actually seen a decrease in price per pound, which has had an inverse effect on Americans' spending habits, in that cheaper prices encourage people to buy more.
The result is obvious. Compared with shoppers 30 years ago, American adults today are twice as likely to be obese, and children and adolescents three times as likely to be overweight. Pediatric type 2 diabetes—which used to be very rare—has markedly increased along with the rise in early childhood obesity. According to previous research, early onset type 2 diabetes appears to be a more aggressive disease from a cardiovascular standpoint [8].
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics
Credit: Lam Thuy Vo / NPR [9]
Soda—One of the Greatest Threats to Your and Your Children's Weight and Health
According to the 2010 Report by the Advisory Committee on the Dietary Guidelines for Americans [10], the top 10 sources of calories in the American diet are:
1. Grain-based desserts (cakes, cookies, donuts, pies, crisps, cobblers, and granola bars) 139 calories a day 6. Alcoholic beverages
2. Yeast breads, 129 calories a day 7. Pasta and pasta dishes
3. Chicken and chicken-mixed dishes, 121 calories a day 8. Mexican mixed dishes
4. Soda, energy drinks, and sports drinks, 114 calories a day 9. Beef and beef-mixed dishes
5. Pizza, 98 calories a day 10. Dairy desserts
Between the previous graphic showing where the majority of food dollars are spent, and this listing detailing the top sources of calories in the American diet, it's easy to recognize that the dietary roots of the American weight problem is linked to carbs—sugars (primarily fructose) and grains—in the form of processed foods and sweet drinks. You've often heard me state that soda is the number one source of calories in the US diet, which it was, based on the 1999-2000 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). The updated NHANES survey above covers nutritional data from 2005-2006, placing grain-based foods in the top two slots.
Still, soda comes in at number four, and I still believe many people, particularly teenagers, probably still get a majority of their calories from fructose-rich drinks like soda.
Needless to say, obesity and its many related chronic health problems will also take a toll on your lifespan, and soda is a major culprit driving these sad health trends. Term Life Insurance may have an alternative motive for creating and posting an infographic online showing soda's effect on your body [11], but in this case the industry managers are actually trying to help you out while simultaneously adding to their bottom lines.
Image source: Term Life Insurance
Basic Tenets of Optimal Health
Leading a common-sense, healthy lifestyle is your best bet to achieve a healthy body and mind. And while conventional medical science may flip-flop back and forth in its recommendations, there are certain basic tenets of optimal health (and healthy weight) that do not change:
Proper Food Choices: For a comprehensive guide on which foods to eat and which to avoid, see my nutrition plan. Generally speaking, you should be looking to focus your diet on whole, ideally organic, unprocessed foods. For the best nutrition and health benefits, you will want to eat a good portion of your food raw.
Avoid sugar, and fructose in particular. All forms of sugar have toxic effects when consumed in excess, and drive multiple disease processes in your body, not the least of which is insulin resistance, a major cause of chronic disease and accelerated aging.
I believe the two primary keys for successful weight management are severely restricting carbohydrates (sugars, fructose, and grains) in your diet, and increasing healthy fat consumption. This will optimize insulin and leptin levels, which is key for maintaining a healthy weight and optimal health.
Regular exercise: Even if you're eating the healthiest diet in the world, you still need to exercise to reach the highest levels of health, and you need to be exercising effectively, which means including high-intensity activities into your rotation. High-intensity interval-type training boosts human growth hormone (HGH) production, which is essential for optimal health, strength and vigor. HGH also helps boost weight loss.
So along with core-strengthening exercises, strength training, and stretching, I highly recommend that twice a week you do Peak Fitness exercises,' which raise your heart rate up to your anaerobic threshold for 20 to 30 seconds, followed by a 90-second recovery period.
Stress Reduction: You cannot be optimally healthy if you avoid addressing the emotional component of your health and longevity, as your emotional state plays a role in nearly every physical disease -- from heart disease and depression, to arthritis and cancer.
Meditation, prayer, social support and exercise are all viable options that can help you maintain emotional and mental equilibrium. I also strongly believe in using simple tools such as the Emotional Freedom Technique (EFT) to address deeper, oftentimes hidden, emotional problems.
Drink plenty of clean water
Maintain a healthy gut: About 80 percent of your immune system resides in your gut, and research is stacking up showing that probiotics—beneficial bacteria—affect your health in a myriad of ways; it can even influence your ability to lose weight. A healthy diet is the ideal way to maintain a healthy gut, and regularly consuming traditionally fermented foods is the easiest, most cost effective way to ensure optimal gut flora
Optimize your vitamin D levels: Research has shown that increasing your vitamin D levels can reduce your risk of death from ALL causes. For practical guidelines on how to use natural sun exposure to optimize your vitamin D benefits, please see my previous article on how to determine if enough UVB is able to penetrate the atmosphere to allow for vitamin D production in your skin
Avoid as many chemicals, toxins, and pollutants as possible: This includes tossing out your toxic household cleaners, soaps, personal hygiene products, air fresheners, bug sprays, lawn pesticides, and insecticides, just to name a few, and replacing them with non-toxic alternatives.
Get plenty of high quality sleep: Regularly catching only a few hours of sleep can hinder metabolism and hormone production in a way that is similar to the effects of aging and the early stages of diabetes. Chronic sleep loss may speed the onset or increase the severity of age-related conditions such as type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure, obesity, and memory loss
This may come as a surprise to some, but data collected from over 60,000 Canadians show that obesity leads to more doctor visits than smoking.
The idea that being overweight can be worse for your health than smoking is likely to make many balk, considering how "normal" it has become to carry around extra pounds, but in terms of overall health effects and subsequent health care costs, it's likely true.
The study estimates that if obesity were not a factor, doctor visits in Canada would decrease by 10 percent. The decrease would be even greater if you take into account problems related to type 2 diabetes, which is also directly related to obesity and poor diet.
With the obesity epidemic putting pressure on health care systems everywhere, this news may trigger financial penalties or incentives to get people to lose weight, according to Medical News Today [1].
"Just as smokers have higher life insurance premiums, people who are obese could also be made to pay more for health insurance. The complication is that obesity tends to be more prevalent among people with low income, making this solution difficult to implement," Medical News Today said.
... "The fact that obesity is more serious than smoking helps people understand the gravity of the problem because they already have some kind of intuitive understanding of how bad smoking is," says [lead researcher, James] McIntosh.
Excess Weight is a Gateway to Chronic Disease
Canadian and American obesity statistics are neck-to-neck, with about one-quarter to one third of adults in the obese category. A staggering two-thirds of Americans are overweight. This does indeed place a heavy burden on the health care system. It's important to realize that a large number of diseases are directly attributable to obesity, including:
Diabetes Polycystic ovarian syndrome Urinary incontinence Pickwickian syndrome
Cancer Gastro-esophageal reflux disease Chronic renal failure Depression
Congestive heart failure Fatty liver disease Lymph edema Osteoarthritis
Enlarged heart Hernia Cellulitis Gout
Pulmonary embolism Erectile dysfunction Stroke Gallbladder disease
Most Adults and Teens Not Exercising and at High Risk of Disease
Physical activity and good health go hand-in-hand. The problem is most adults and teens aren't physically active enough to stay healthy and maintain ideal weight. According to a series in the journal Lancet on physical activity and health, not exercising is leaving around a third of adults (1.5 billion people) and 4 out of 5 adolescents at a 20-30 percent greater risk of diabetes, heart disease, and some types of cancer.
Reported by Medical News Today [2]:
"Investigations revealed that the recommended activities, known as moderate-intensity activities, like walking for 30 minutes at least 5 times a week, or running for 20 minutes 3 times a week, is not being done by approximately 3 out of 10 adults worldwide."
Worse yet, an estimated 80 percent of 13 to 15 year olds are not getting the recommended one hour per day of physical activity! According to one of the Lancet reports [3], lack of exercise causes as many as 1 in 10 premature deaths around the world each year — roughly as many as smoking...
Too Much TV Linked with Thicker, Weaker Kids
There can be little doubt that our modern lifestyle is at the heart of the problem. We eat poorly and don't exercise enough. The results of this sedentary, under-nourished lifestyle are evident in today's children. Today, one-third of all American children ages 2-19 are overweight or obese. Most of these children will become diabetic.
Spending hours in front of the TV or playing video games is of course a hallmark of a sedentary lifestyle.
If you needed any more proof that too much time in front of the TV is not good for kids, then you'll be interested in a new study that not only affirms that TV-time is linked to sleep problems and weight problems, but also to weaker muscles [4]. The new study, published in the International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity [5], shows that the number of hours in front of the TV during preschool years is linked to increased waist size and decreased leg strength.
According to the authors:
"Watching television excessively in early childhood may eventually compromise muscular fitness and waist circumference in children as they approach pubertal age."
This is significant, the study's authors said, because it not only could affect performance in sports activities, but also cardiovascular health and susceptibility to injuries. TV programming also expose your children to commercials promoting health-harming junk foods; literally programming them from infancy to have a skewed understanding of what to eat. Just as you don't want your child exposed to ads for cigarettes during Saturday morning cartoons, neither should your kids be bombarded by non-stop commercials for sugary foods and snacks.
Tips for Raising Healthy Weight Children
If you have children who are overweight or obese, I highly suggest you pick up a copy of my book Generation XL, which is packed with tools to transform the health of your children. In the meantime, I would recommend getting started on these crucial lifestyle changes right now:
Set strict viewing limits for TV, computer and video games
Make exercise a part of your family's daily schedule. Remember, children model your behavior more than anything else
Get rid of the junk food and sweetened drinks
Set family meal times and prepare home-cooked meals for your family
Reward your children with kind words, not food
Where Americans Spend Grocery Money, 1982 vs. Today
Overall, about 90 percent of the money Americans spend on food is spent on processed foods [6]. This includes restaurant foods (i.e. food away from home) and processed grocery foods that require little or no preparation time before consuming.
When looking at the ratio of money spent on store-bought groceries only, Americans spend nearly a fourth of their grocery money on processed foods and sweets—twice as much as they did in 1982—according to Department of Labor statistics [7]. Pricing of meats, sugar, and flour has had a great influence our spending habits. These items have actually seen a decrease in price per pound, which has had an inverse effect on Americans' spending habits, in that cheaper prices encourage people to buy more.
The result is obvious. Compared with shoppers 30 years ago, American adults today are twice as likely to be obese, and children and adolescents three times as likely to be overweight. Pediatric type 2 diabetes—which used to be very rare—has markedly increased along with the rise in early childhood obesity. According to previous research, early onset type 2 diabetes appears to be a more aggressive disease from a cardiovascular standpoint [8].
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics
Credit: Lam Thuy Vo / NPR [9]
Soda—One of the Greatest Threats to Your and Your Children's Weight and Health
According to the 2010 Report by the Advisory Committee on the Dietary Guidelines for Americans [10], the top 10 sources of calories in the American diet are:
1. Grain-based desserts (cakes, cookies, donuts, pies, crisps, cobblers, and granola bars) 139 calories a day 6. Alcoholic beverages
2. Yeast breads, 129 calories a day 7. Pasta and pasta dishes
3. Chicken and chicken-mixed dishes, 121 calories a day 8. Mexican mixed dishes
4. Soda, energy drinks, and sports drinks, 114 calories a day 9. Beef and beef-mixed dishes
5. Pizza, 98 calories a day 10. Dairy desserts
Between the previous graphic showing where the majority of food dollars are spent, and this listing detailing the top sources of calories in the American diet, it's easy to recognize that the dietary roots of the American weight problem is linked to carbs—sugars (primarily fructose) and grains—in the form of processed foods and sweet drinks. You've often heard me state that soda is the number one source of calories in the US diet, which it was, based on the 1999-2000 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). The updated NHANES survey above covers nutritional data from 2005-2006, placing grain-based foods in the top two slots.
Still, soda comes in at number four, and I still believe many people, particularly teenagers, probably still get a majority of their calories from fructose-rich drinks like soda.
Needless to say, obesity and its many related chronic health problems will also take a toll on your lifespan, and soda is a major culprit driving these sad health trends. Term Life Insurance may have an alternative motive for creating and posting an infographic online showing soda's effect on your body [11], but in this case the industry managers are actually trying to help you out while simultaneously adding to their bottom lines.
Image source: Term Life Insurance
Basic Tenets of Optimal Health
Leading a common-sense, healthy lifestyle is your best bet to achieve a healthy body and mind. And while conventional medical science may flip-flop back and forth in its recommendations, there are certain basic tenets of optimal health (and healthy weight) that do not change:
Proper Food Choices: For a comprehensive guide on which foods to eat and which to avoid, see my nutrition plan. Generally speaking, you should be looking to focus your diet on whole, ideally organic, unprocessed foods. For the best nutrition and health benefits, you will want to eat a good portion of your food raw.
Avoid sugar, and fructose in particular. All forms of sugar have toxic effects when consumed in excess, and drive multiple disease processes in your body, not the least of which is insulin resistance, a major cause of chronic disease and accelerated aging.
I believe the two primary keys for successful weight management are severely restricting carbohydrates (sugars, fructose, and grains) in your diet, and increasing healthy fat consumption. This will optimize insulin and leptin levels, which is key for maintaining a healthy weight and optimal health.
Regular exercise: Even if you're eating the healthiest diet in the world, you still need to exercise to reach the highest levels of health, and you need to be exercising effectively, which means including high-intensity activities into your rotation. High-intensity interval-type training boosts human growth hormone (HGH) production, which is essential for optimal health, strength and vigor. HGH also helps boost weight loss.
So along with core-strengthening exercises, strength training, and stretching, I highly recommend that twice a week you do Peak Fitness exercises,' which raise your heart rate up to your anaerobic threshold for 20 to 30 seconds, followed by a 90-second recovery period.
Stress Reduction: You cannot be optimally healthy if you avoid addressing the emotional component of your health and longevity, as your emotional state plays a role in nearly every physical disease -- from heart disease and depression, to arthritis and cancer.
Meditation, prayer, social support and exercise are all viable options that can help you maintain emotional and mental equilibrium. I also strongly believe in using simple tools such as the Emotional Freedom Technique (EFT) to address deeper, oftentimes hidden, emotional problems.
Drink plenty of clean water
Maintain a healthy gut: About 80 percent of your immune system resides in your gut, and research is stacking up showing that probiotics—beneficial bacteria—affect your health in a myriad of ways; it can even influence your ability to lose weight. A healthy diet is the ideal way to maintain a healthy gut, and regularly consuming traditionally fermented foods is the easiest, most cost effective way to ensure optimal gut flora
Optimize your vitamin D levels: Research has shown that increasing your vitamin D levels can reduce your risk of death from ALL causes. For practical guidelines on how to use natural sun exposure to optimize your vitamin D benefits, please see my previous article on how to determine if enough UVB is able to penetrate the atmosphere to allow for vitamin D production in your skin
Avoid as many chemicals, toxins, and pollutants as possible: This includes tossing out your toxic household cleaners, soaps, personal hygiene products, air fresheners, bug sprays, lawn pesticides, and insecticides, just to name a few, and replacing them with non-toxic alternatives.
Get plenty of high quality sleep: Regularly catching only a few hours of sleep can hinder metabolism and hormone production in a way that is similar to the effects of aging and the early stages of diabetes. Chronic sleep loss may speed the onset or increase the severity of age-related conditions such as type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure, obesity, and memory loss
Friday, June 29, 2012
Three key factors for sports & Nutrition
By Dr. Mercola
When scientists at the University of Florida realized their student athletes needed a quick source of energy and hydration, the carbohydrate-loaded sports drink Gatorade was born.
In the 40 or so years since then, a boatload of carbed-up diet plans and so-called performance-boosting drinks and foods have hit the market, all espousing the benefits of carbohydrates and the concept of carbohydrate-loading. The idea is to saturate yourself with carbs so your muscles will have plenty of glycogen to go on while you exercise.
This worked fine for really fit athletes that were intensely working out and sweating copiously, as they needed to replace those fluids and carbs. However, it is totally inappropriate to transfer this to the vast majority of non-athletes that exercise casually, or just to get healthy, in which they are typically losing large amounts of sweat or burning carbs during their workout.
In fact new research shows there’s more to it than just stuffing yourself with carbs. Proteins, glutamic acid, leucine, and other essential amino acids also play a part in energy and sports nutrition―and there’s a certain timing of consumption that goes with them to assure that you’re getting the best results for your efforts.
The featured article in Functional Ingredients discusses the use of carbohydrates, protein and amino acids, caffeine, beta-alanine and creatine in sports nutrition.
While I agree on many points, such as the importance of whey for stimulating muscle protein synthesis, I strongly disagree with the article's stance on using multiple types of sugars to replenish glycogen stores. As I'll discuss below, the focus on carbs is one of the most detrimental pieces of advice that is still widely promoted to athletes and non-athletes alike.
Additionally, the article does not review the exciting new research on the potential benefits of intermittent fasting to boost exercise benefits, which I will expound upon below. This is an oft-ignored factor that can have a potent impact, although it's not necessarily recommended for everyone, or for every circumstance.
Sports Nutrition—Going Beyond Carb-Loading
The food you eat has an immense impact not only on your general health, but on the benefits you will ultimately reap from your workouts. What you eat can either add to or detract from your exercise benefits, and if you're devoting the time to exercise, you'd be well advised to harness your meals to support your goals, not detract from them.
First and foremost, contrary to popular advice, to maximize the benefits of exercise, you'll want to avoid fructose and other sugars unless you are engaged in intensive and prolonged cardio exercises that will allow you to burn these sugars, especially fructose, and not store them as fat.
This means that most casual exercisers and those seeking to improve body composition and optimize health and fitness rather than boost athletic performance or competitiveness, need to ditch the energy drinks, sports drinks, most energy bars and even "healthy" drinks like vitamin water, as these will effectively sabotage your exercise benefits. Fructose, which is found primarily in the form of high fructose corn syrup, is particularly detrimental as it tricks your body into gaining weight by turning off your body's appetite-control system.
This happens because fructose does not appropriately stimulate insulin, which in turn does not suppress ghrelin (the "hunger hormone") and doesn't stimulate leptin (the "satiety hormone"). The end result is that you end up eating more causing uncontrolled accumulation of sugar metabolites in your liver, which then leads to insulin resistance. Fructose also rapidly leads to decreased HDL (“good” cholesterol), increased LDL (“bad” cholesterol), elevated triglycerides, elevated blood sugar, and high blood pressure—i.e. classic metabolic syndrome. And if that’s not bad enough, fructose has shown to increase the levels of TNF-α, a pro-inflammatory cytokine known to inhibit fat burning and promote muscle wasting.
Exercise, which in and of itself improves insulin sensitivity will NOT compensate for excessive use of fructose.
Now, in terms of its impact on your fitness, it’s important to realize that consuming fructose, including that from processed fruit juices, within two hours of your workout (before or after) will also decimate your natural human growth hormone (HGH) production.
Increasing your HGH level is a major benefit of exercise, provided you’re using high-intensity interval training, which is the primary way to boost HGH naturally (you can also use super-slow weight training to accomplish similar results). HGH is also known as “the fitness hormone,” and some athletes pay a lot of money for HGH injections. There are significant drawbacks to doing that, and the combination of eliminating fructose and using high-intensity interval training while fasting is definitely the preferred way to optimize your HGH.
Three Factors of Effective Fitness Nutrition
Fitness expert Ori Hofmekler, author of Maximum Muscle Minimum Fat, and Unlocking Your Muscle Gene, was responsible for first enlightening me to the curious paradox of boosting muscle building by exercising while fasted (meaning on an empty stomach). As it turns out, amino acids and protein serve not just as building blocks for tissues and muscle. Certain amino acids can also signal genes in your muscle to grow and to build protein, and they do that even during times of food deprivation as long as these amino acids are circulating through your blood stream.
Moreover, scientists have found that the ratio between protein and carbohydrates is critically important, especially as you age. Many make the mistake of eating too many carbs in relation to protein and fat. Research shows that high-carbohydrate diets fail to build muscle, even in younger people due to their detrimental effect on insulin. Again and again, it's the high-protein/high-fat/low-carbohydrate diet that proves the most effective both for muscle building and weight loss.
To summarize, there are three primary factors involved in effective fitness nutrition, to which you can then add the strategy of exercising while in a fasted state to further boost results:
A high-protein, low-carbohydrate diet. Keep in mind that most people need between 50-70 percent healthy fats in their diet, which take the place of the carbs you're eliminating. In order to build muscle, you clearly need calories, but there's compelling evidence showing that calories from fat are far better than calories from carbohydrates
Certain amino acids, the most notable of which is leucine (others can also be useful. Beta-alanine/carnosine, for example, has been found to improve performance in high intensity exercise and can help reduce muscle soreness). But remember that it is crucial that you avoid amino acid supplements of leucine. It is far better to get it from whole foods. Note that as free form amino acids, leucine has shown to disrupt insulin activity and cause insulin resistance. The highest source of leucine is high quality whey protein that is minimally processed and not whey protein isolate, which is overproccessed, and typically yields a massive distortion of protein and a loss of nutritional co-factors.
Whether you choose to exercise on an empty stomach or not, your post exercise meal is crucial to stop the catabolic process in your muscle and shift the process toward repair and growth.
If you fail to feed your muscle at the right time after exercise, the catabolic process will go too far and can potentially damage your muscle. The correct time to eat is within 30 minutes after your workout. Your meal should include fast-assimilating proteins, such as high-quality whey protein with no sugar added. To learn more, please see this previous article that discusses the use of whey protein for optimal muscle building
If you cannot exercise in a fasted state due to fatigue, or simply opt not to for some other reason, you can also consume whey protein before exercise. It's an excellent breakfast choice. A 2010 study published in the journal Medicine and Science in Sports & Exercisei demonstrated that consuming whey protein (20g protein / serving) 30 minutes before resistance training can boost your body's metabolism for as much as 24 hours after your workout. It appears as though the amino acids found in high-quality whey protein activate certain cellular mechanisms (mTORC-1), which in turn promote muscle protein synthesis, boost thyroid, and also protect against declining testosterone levels after exercise.
In practical terms, consuming 20 grams of net protein from quality whey before exercise and another serving of 20-30 g net protein afterward will most likely yield the double benefit of increasing both fat burning and muscle build-up at the same time. Again, not everyone will need to eat something prior to exercise, but if you do, a high-quality whey protein is your best bet. It'll curb your hunger while still optimizing fat burning.
The only exception is if you are doing strength training, as when you are fasting for 14-18 hours you typically deplete most of you glycogen stores so it is difficult to lift your maximum weight to failure. Hence, if you are doing heavy lifting to failure, you may want to avoid training while fasting on those days. In these cases it is likely helpful to consume some healthy slow releasing starchy carbs the night before working out so your glycogen stores won’t be depleted in the morning. Then, have whey protein as a pre-exercise meal to grant sufficient supply of branched chain amino acids for optimum muscle fueling during your workout.
Boost Fitness Results with Intermittent Fasting
Exercising on an empty stomach has been shown to have a number of health and fitness benefits. It may even be a key to keep your body biologically young. This is most easily accomplished if you exercise first thing in the morning, before breakfast. Part of the explanation for why exercising while fasted is beneficial is that this regimen complements your sympathetic nervous system (SNS) along with your capacity to burn fat. Your body's fat burning processes are controlled by your SNS, and your SNS is activated by exercise, and by lack of food.
The combination of fasting and exercising maximizes the impact of cellular factors and catalysts (cyclic AMP and AMP Kinases), which force the breakdown of fat and glycogen for energy. This is why training on an empty stomach will effectively force your body to burn fat.
Regardless of when you choose to exercise, remember that you need to eat 30 minutes after your workout, which will effectively break your fast. If you exercise in the late morning or early afternoon, you could break your fast by including 20 grams net protein from a fast-assimilating source like a high-quality whey protein concentrate 30 minutes before you start your exercise, and then have another recovery meal 30 minutes after.
Exercise and fasting yield acute oxidative stress, which keeps your muscles' mitochondria, neuro-motors and fibers intact. You may have heard of oxidative stress before in a negative light, and indeed, when it is chronic it can indeed lead to disease. But acute oxidative stress, such as occurs due to short intense exercise or periodic fasting, actually benefits your muscle.
As explained by Ori Hofmekler:
". . . it's essential for keeping your muscle machinery tuned. Technically, acute oxidative stress makes your muscle increasingly resilient to oxidative stress; it stimulates glutathione and SOD production in your mitochondria along with increased muscular capacity to utilize energy, generate force and resist fatigue. Hence, exercise and fasting help counteract all the main determinants of muscle aging. But there is something else about exercise and fasting. When combined, they trigger a mechanism that recycles and rejuvenates your brain and muscle tissues.
Growing evidence indicates that fasting and exercise trigger genes and growth factors, which recycle and rejuvenate your brain and muscle tissues. These growth factors include brain derived neurotropic factor (BDNF), Insulin Like Growth Factor (IGF-1), and muscle regulatory factors (MRFs); they signal brain stem cells and muscle satellite cells to convert into new neurons and new muscle cells respectively. Incredibly, BDNF also expresses itself in the neuro-muscular system where it protects neuro-motors from degradation. This means that exercise while fasting signals your body to keep your brain, neuro-motors and muscle fibers biologically young."
Amino Acids—Essential Building Blocks to Strengthen Muscles
As mentioned earlier, the amino acid leucine is one of the most important for fitness. It’s part of branched-chain amino acid found in certain foods, and serves multiple functions in your body, one of which is signaling the mTOR (Mammalian Target of Rapamycin) mechanism, which signals protein to be created and builds your muscle. But that’s not all.
Ori Hofmekler explains:
"Leucine has shown to promote the anti-inflammatory cytokine interleukin 15 (IL-15), which has been regarded as the most powerful fitness promoting protein produced by your muscle. IL-15 acts as an anti-inflammatory, anti-obesity, muscle-regenerating signaling agent with unmatching effects on body transformation and anti-aging.
Furthermore leucine along with calcium blocks the obesity promoting effect of excess Vitamin D calciferol in adipose tissues (excess of vitamin d in fat cells induces central obesity which can be blocked by calcium/leucine intake such as from dairy, particularly whey protein). Finally, leucine/IL 15 anti-inflammatory actions have been linked to mitochondrial biogenesis, increased thermogensis, and increased energy utilization efficiency probably via activation of the longevity gene SIRT-1.”
Leucine also indirectly promotes the increase of glutathione in your body, as its anti-inflammatory actions can help spare glutathione molecules that would have otherwise be recruited to counteract inflammatory processes.
However, in order to be effective, you need far more than the recommended daily allowance (RDA) of leucine. The reason for this is because even though leucine is relatively abundant in our food supply, it does not appear in high concentrations, and is often wasted as an energy substrate or used as a building block rather than an anabolic agent. This means that to establish the right anabolic environment, you need to increase leucine consumption beyond maintenance requirements.
That said, keep in mind that using leucine as a free form amino acid can be highly counterproductive as when free form amino acids are artificially administrated, they rapidly enter your circulation while disrupting insulin function, and impairing your body's glycemic control. Food based leucine is really the ideal form that can benefit your muscles without side effects. The highest concentrations of leucine and other branched chain amino acids (BCAA) are found in dairy products; particularly whey protein. and quality cheese.
Based on nitrogen-balance measurements, the requirement for leucine to maintain body protein is 1-3 grams daily. To optimize its anabolic pathway, you need an estimated 8g - 16g of leucine daily. The following chart presents leucine content in common foods. As you can see, whey protein is ideal for getting sufficient amounts of leucine in your diet. You only need three ounces of whey protein, compared to a pound and a half of chicken to get 8 grams of leucine:
Leucine Content in food / per 100g
Whey Protein Concentrate 8.0g
Raw Cheddar Cheese 3.6g
Lean Beef 1.7g
Salmon 1.6g
Almonds 1.5g
Chicken 1.4g
Chick Peas 1.4g
Raw Eggs 1.0g
Egg Yolk 1.4g
Sheep Milk 0.6g
Pork 0.4g
Cow Milk 0.3g
What's Your Goal? Fitness or Longevity?
In closing, I want to share some additional insights from Ori Hofmekler with regards to intermittent fasting. It’s important to realize that when it comes to diet and exercise, you actually have to tailor them to your end goal—either maximum fitness, or maximum longevity. You cannot accomplish both at the same time... This is even more pronounced for women, who also trade extreme fitness for their reproductive capacity. Below, Ori expounds on these issues.
By Ori Hofmekler
Gender is certainly an important factor in human and animal studies. Female-specific responses to fasting raise an interesting scientific phenomenon. Researchers have been finding evidence that there is indeed a tradeoff between virility and longevity of organisms. Apparently the same genes that promote human longevity may trigger biological mechanisms that suppress female reproductive capacity. Hence, fasting and intense exercise protocols, known to promote longevity, also lower estrogen level and thereby modulate body composition and suppress female reproductive capacity.
This is apparently part of an early adaption mechanism to primordial conditions of food scarcity and hardship, which requires increased strength and durability on the account of reproductivity. Hence, hard conditions are not biologically suitable times for pregnancy and child bearing.
I discussed this issue with Dr. Marc Mattson, Prof. of Neurosciences at Johns Hopkins University a few years ago. According to Mattson, women who fast or are on calorie restriction, have the tendency to get leaner, become increasingly addicted to physical exercise, and lose their menstrual cycle. Nonetheless, they seem to gain substantial improvements in all main biological markers of longevity – i.e. increased insulin sensitivity, increased GH secretion, improved lipid profile, improved anti-inflammatory cytokine profile, improved cognitive function, etc.
Note that fasting triggers the longevity gene SIRT-1, which regulates mitochondrial energy production along with the gene transcription promoter protein PGC-1α, which increases mitochondrial biogenesis and density in the muscle.
Yes, mitochondrial energy utilization efficiency is a key to longevity.
One of the most notable benefits of fasting is its profound anti-inflammatory effect. Fasting increases production of anti-inflammatory cytokines while suppressing pro-inflammatory cytokines such as TNF-α and IL-6. Note that pro-inflammatory cytokines produced by fat cells (adipokines) are associated with insulin resistance, obesity, metabolic syndrome, and a shorter life span; whereas anti-inflammatory cytokines, such as adiponectin and IL-15, are associated with improved insulin sensitivity, increased thermogenesis, decreased fat storage, increased muscle regeneration and increased life span (this probably deserves another article).
Finally, in view of the current epidemic of excess estrogen in females and males, caused by estrogenic chemicals and foods (such as petrochemicals and soy), fasting and IF can be used as an effective therapeutic strategy to balance estrogen and prevent related metabolic disorders and cancer.
To sum this up, the female-specific response to fasting or intermittent fasting is no different than the female response to intense exercise. There is indeed a tradeoff between benefits and side effects. And the question "should women fast" raises the same issues as the question "should women exercise intensely".
References:
i Medicine and Science in Sports & Exercise May 2010: 42(5); 998-1003
Sources:
NewHope 360 June 11, 2012
When scientists at the University of Florida realized their student athletes needed a quick source of energy and hydration, the carbohydrate-loaded sports drink Gatorade was born.
In the 40 or so years since then, a boatload of carbed-up diet plans and so-called performance-boosting drinks and foods have hit the market, all espousing the benefits of carbohydrates and the concept of carbohydrate-loading. The idea is to saturate yourself with carbs so your muscles will have plenty of glycogen to go on while you exercise.
This worked fine for really fit athletes that were intensely working out and sweating copiously, as they needed to replace those fluids and carbs. However, it is totally inappropriate to transfer this to the vast majority of non-athletes that exercise casually, or just to get healthy, in which they are typically losing large amounts of sweat or burning carbs during their workout.
In fact new research shows there’s more to it than just stuffing yourself with carbs. Proteins, glutamic acid, leucine, and other essential amino acids also play a part in energy and sports nutrition―and there’s a certain timing of consumption that goes with them to assure that you’re getting the best results for your efforts.
The featured article in Functional Ingredients discusses the use of carbohydrates, protein and amino acids, caffeine, beta-alanine and creatine in sports nutrition.
While I agree on many points, such as the importance of whey for stimulating muscle protein synthesis, I strongly disagree with the article's stance on using multiple types of sugars to replenish glycogen stores. As I'll discuss below, the focus on carbs is one of the most detrimental pieces of advice that is still widely promoted to athletes and non-athletes alike.
Additionally, the article does not review the exciting new research on the potential benefits of intermittent fasting to boost exercise benefits, which I will expound upon below. This is an oft-ignored factor that can have a potent impact, although it's not necessarily recommended for everyone, or for every circumstance.
Sports Nutrition—Going Beyond Carb-Loading
The food you eat has an immense impact not only on your general health, but on the benefits you will ultimately reap from your workouts. What you eat can either add to or detract from your exercise benefits, and if you're devoting the time to exercise, you'd be well advised to harness your meals to support your goals, not detract from them.
First and foremost, contrary to popular advice, to maximize the benefits of exercise, you'll want to avoid fructose and other sugars unless you are engaged in intensive and prolonged cardio exercises that will allow you to burn these sugars, especially fructose, and not store them as fat.
This means that most casual exercisers and those seeking to improve body composition and optimize health and fitness rather than boost athletic performance or competitiveness, need to ditch the energy drinks, sports drinks, most energy bars and even "healthy" drinks like vitamin water, as these will effectively sabotage your exercise benefits. Fructose, which is found primarily in the form of high fructose corn syrup, is particularly detrimental as it tricks your body into gaining weight by turning off your body's appetite-control system.
This happens because fructose does not appropriately stimulate insulin, which in turn does not suppress ghrelin (the "hunger hormone") and doesn't stimulate leptin (the "satiety hormone"). The end result is that you end up eating more causing uncontrolled accumulation of sugar metabolites in your liver, which then leads to insulin resistance. Fructose also rapidly leads to decreased HDL (“good” cholesterol), increased LDL (“bad” cholesterol), elevated triglycerides, elevated blood sugar, and high blood pressure—i.e. classic metabolic syndrome. And if that’s not bad enough, fructose has shown to increase the levels of TNF-α, a pro-inflammatory cytokine known to inhibit fat burning and promote muscle wasting.
Exercise, which in and of itself improves insulin sensitivity will NOT compensate for excessive use of fructose.
Now, in terms of its impact on your fitness, it’s important to realize that consuming fructose, including that from processed fruit juices, within two hours of your workout (before or after) will also decimate your natural human growth hormone (HGH) production.
Increasing your HGH level is a major benefit of exercise, provided you’re using high-intensity interval training, which is the primary way to boost HGH naturally (you can also use super-slow weight training to accomplish similar results). HGH is also known as “the fitness hormone,” and some athletes pay a lot of money for HGH injections. There are significant drawbacks to doing that, and the combination of eliminating fructose and using high-intensity interval training while fasting is definitely the preferred way to optimize your HGH.
Three Factors of Effective Fitness Nutrition
Fitness expert Ori Hofmekler, author of Maximum Muscle Minimum Fat, and Unlocking Your Muscle Gene, was responsible for first enlightening me to the curious paradox of boosting muscle building by exercising while fasted (meaning on an empty stomach). As it turns out, amino acids and protein serve not just as building blocks for tissues and muscle. Certain amino acids can also signal genes in your muscle to grow and to build protein, and they do that even during times of food deprivation as long as these amino acids are circulating through your blood stream.
Moreover, scientists have found that the ratio between protein and carbohydrates is critically important, especially as you age. Many make the mistake of eating too many carbs in relation to protein and fat. Research shows that high-carbohydrate diets fail to build muscle, even in younger people due to their detrimental effect on insulin. Again and again, it's the high-protein/high-fat/low-carbohydrate diet that proves the most effective both for muscle building and weight loss.
To summarize, there are three primary factors involved in effective fitness nutrition, to which you can then add the strategy of exercising while in a fasted state to further boost results:
A high-protein, low-carbohydrate diet. Keep in mind that most people need between 50-70 percent healthy fats in their diet, which take the place of the carbs you're eliminating. In order to build muscle, you clearly need calories, but there's compelling evidence showing that calories from fat are far better than calories from carbohydrates
Certain amino acids, the most notable of which is leucine (others can also be useful. Beta-alanine/carnosine, for example, has been found to improve performance in high intensity exercise and can help reduce muscle soreness). But remember that it is crucial that you avoid amino acid supplements of leucine. It is far better to get it from whole foods. Note that as free form amino acids, leucine has shown to disrupt insulin activity and cause insulin resistance. The highest source of leucine is high quality whey protein that is minimally processed and not whey protein isolate, which is overproccessed, and typically yields a massive distortion of protein and a loss of nutritional co-factors.
Whether you choose to exercise on an empty stomach or not, your post exercise meal is crucial to stop the catabolic process in your muscle and shift the process toward repair and growth.
If you fail to feed your muscle at the right time after exercise, the catabolic process will go too far and can potentially damage your muscle. The correct time to eat is within 30 minutes after your workout. Your meal should include fast-assimilating proteins, such as high-quality whey protein with no sugar added. To learn more, please see this previous article that discusses the use of whey protein for optimal muscle building
If you cannot exercise in a fasted state due to fatigue, or simply opt not to for some other reason, you can also consume whey protein before exercise. It's an excellent breakfast choice. A 2010 study published in the journal Medicine and Science in Sports & Exercisei demonstrated that consuming whey protein (20g protein / serving) 30 minutes before resistance training can boost your body's metabolism for as much as 24 hours after your workout. It appears as though the amino acids found in high-quality whey protein activate certain cellular mechanisms (mTORC-1), which in turn promote muscle protein synthesis, boost thyroid, and also protect against declining testosterone levels after exercise.
In practical terms, consuming 20 grams of net protein from quality whey before exercise and another serving of 20-30 g net protein afterward will most likely yield the double benefit of increasing both fat burning and muscle build-up at the same time. Again, not everyone will need to eat something prior to exercise, but if you do, a high-quality whey protein is your best bet. It'll curb your hunger while still optimizing fat burning.
The only exception is if you are doing strength training, as when you are fasting for 14-18 hours you typically deplete most of you glycogen stores so it is difficult to lift your maximum weight to failure. Hence, if you are doing heavy lifting to failure, you may want to avoid training while fasting on those days. In these cases it is likely helpful to consume some healthy slow releasing starchy carbs the night before working out so your glycogen stores won’t be depleted in the morning. Then, have whey protein as a pre-exercise meal to grant sufficient supply of branched chain amino acids for optimum muscle fueling during your workout.
Boost Fitness Results with Intermittent Fasting
Exercising on an empty stomach has been shown to have a number of health and fitness benefits. It may even be a key to keep your body biologically young. This is most easily accomplished if you exercise first thing in the morning, before breakfast. Part of the explanation for why exercising while fasted is beneficial is that this regimen complements your sympathetic nervous system (SNS) along with your capacity to burn fat. Your body's fat burning processes are controlled by your SNS, and your SNS is activated by exercise, and by lack of food.
The combination of fasting and exercising maximizes the impact of cellular factors and catalysts (cyclic AMP and AMP Kinases), which force the breakdown of fat and glycogen for energy. This is why training on an empty stomach will effectively force your body to burn fat.
Regardless of when you choose to exercise, remember that you need to eat 30 minutes after your workout, which will effectively break your fast. If you exercise in the late morning or early afternoon, you could break your fast by including 20 grams net protein from a fast-assimilating source like a high-quality whey protein concentrate 30 minutes before you start your exercise, and then have another recovery meal 30 minutes after.
Exercise and fasting yield acute oxidative stress, which keeps your muscles' mitochondria, neuro-motors and fibers intact. You may have heard of oxidative stress before in a negative light, and indeed, when it is chronic it can indeed lead to disease. But acute oxidative stress, such as occurs due to short intense exercise or periodic fasting, actually benefits your muscle.
As explained by Ori Hofmekler:
". . . it's essential for keeping your muscle machinery tuned. Technically, acute oxidative stress makes your muscle increasingly resilient to oxidative stress; it stimulates glutathione and SOD production in your mitochondria along with increased muscular capacity to utilize energy, generate force and resist fatigue. Hence, exercise and fasting help counteract all the main determinants of muscle aging. But there is something else about exercise and fasting. When combined, they trigger a mechanism that recycles and rejuvenates your brain and muscle tissues.
Growing evidence indicates that fasting and exercise trigger genes and growth factors, which recycle and rejuvenate your brain and muscle tissues. These growth factors include brain derived neurotropic factor (BDNF), Insulin Like Growth Factor (IGF-1), and muscle regulatory factors (MRFs); they signal brain stem cells and muscle satellite cells to convert into new neurons and new muscle cells respectively. Incredibly, BDNF also expresses itself in the neuro-muscular system where it protects neuro-motors from degradation. This means that exercise while fasting signals your body to keep your brain, neuro-motors and muscle fibers biologically young."
Amino Acids—Essential Building Blocks to Strengthen Muscles
As mentioned earlier, the amino acid leucine is one of the most important for fitness. It’s part of branched-chain amino acid found in certain foods, and serves multiple functions in your body, one of which is signaling the mTOR (Mammalian Target of Rapamycin) mechanism, which signals protein to be created and builds your muscle. But that’s not all.
Ori Hofmekler explains:
"Leucine has shown to promote the anti-inflammatory cytokine interleukin 15 (IL-15), which has been regarded as the most powerful fitness promoting protein produced by your muscle. IL-15 acts as an anti-inflammatory, anti-obesity, muscle-regenerating signaling agent with unmatching effects on body transformation and anti-aging.
Furthermore leucine along with calcium blocks the obesity promoting effect of excess Vitamin D calciferol in adipose tissues (excess of vitamin d in fat cells induces central obesity which can be blocked by calcium/leucine intake such as from dairy, particularly whey protein). Finally, leucine/IL 15 anti-inflammatory actions have been linked to mitochondrial biogenesis, increased thermogensis, and increased energy utilization efficiency probably via activation of the longevity gene SIRT-1.”
Leucine also indirectly promotes the increase of glutathione in your body, as its anti-inflammatory actions can help spare glutathione molecules that would have otherwise be recruited to counteract inflammatory processes.
However, in order to be effective, you need far more than the recommended daily allowance (RDA) of leucine. The reason for this is because even though leucine is relatively abundant in our food supply, it does not appear in high concentrations, and is often wasted as an energy substrate or used as a building block rather than an anabolic agent. This means that to establish the right anabolic environment, you need to increase leucine consumption beyond maintenance requirements.
That said, keep in mind that using leucine as a free form amino acid can be highly counterproductive as when free form amino acids are artificially administrated, they rapidly enter your circulation while disrupting insulin function, and impairing your body's glycemic control. Food based leucine is really the ideal form that can benefit your muscles without side effects. The highest concentrations of leucine and other branched chain amino acids (BCAA) are found in dairy products; particularly whey protein. and quality cheese.
Based on nitrogen-balance measurements, the requirement for leucine to maintain body protein is 1-3 grams daily. To optimize its anabolic pathway, you need an estimated 8g - 16g of leucine daily. The following chart presents leucine content in common foods. As you can see, whey protein is ideal for getting sufficient amounts of leucine in your diet. You only need three ounces of whey protein, compared to a pound and a half of chicken to get 8 grams of leucine:
Leucine Content in food / per 100g
Whey Protein Concentrate 8.0g
Raw Cheddar Cheese 3.6g
Lean Beef 1.7g
Salmon 1.6g
Almonds 1.5g
Chicken 1.4g
Chick Peas 1.4g
Raw Eggs 1.0g
Egg Yolk 1.4g
Sheep Milk 0.6g
Pork 0.4g
Cow Milk 0.3g
What's Your Goal? Fitness or Longevity?
In closing, I want to share some additional insights from Ori Hofmekler with regards to intermittent fasting. It’s important to realize that when it comes to diet and exercise, you actually have to tailor them to your end goal—either maximum fitness, or maximum longevity. You cannot accomplish both at the same time... This is even more pronounced for women, who also trade extreme fitness for their reproductive capacity. Below, Ori expounds on these issues.
By Ori Hofmekler
Gender is certainly an important factor in human and animal studies. Female-specific responses to fasting raise an interesting scientific phenomenon. Researchers have been finding evidence that there is indeed a tradeoff between virility and longevity of organisms. Apparently the same genes that promote human longevity may trigger biological mechanisms that suppress female reproductive capacity. Hence, fasting and intense exercise protocols, known to promote longevity, also lower estrogen level and thereby modulate body composition and suppress female reproductive capacity.
This is apparently part of an early adaption mechanism to primordial conditions of food scarcity and hardship, which requires increased strength and durability on the account of reproductivity. Hence, hard conditions are not biologically suitable times for pregnancy and child bearing.
I discussed this issue with Dr. Marc Mattson, Prof. of Neurosciences at Johns Hopkins University a few years ago. According to Mattson, women who fast or are on calorie restriction, have the tendency to get leaner, become increasingly addicted to physical exercise, and lose their menstrual cycle. Nonetheless, they seem to gain substantial improvements in all main biological markers of longevity – i.e. increased insulin sensitivity, increased GH secretion, improved lipid profile, improved anti-inflammatory cytokine profile, improved cognitive function, etc.
Note that fasting triggers the longevity gene SIRT-1, which regulates mitochondrial energy production along with the gene transcription promoter protein PGC-1α, which increases mitochondrial biogenesis and density in the muscle.
Yes, mitochondrial energy utilization efficiency is a key to longevity.
One of the most notable benefits of fasting is its profound anti-inflammatory effect. Fasting increases production of anti-inflammatory cytokines while suppressing pro-inflammatory cytokines such as TNF-α and IL-6. Note that pro-inflammatory cytokines produced by fat cells (adipokines) are associated with insulin resistance, obesity, metabolic syndrome, and a shorter life span; whereas anti-inflammatory cytokines, such as adiponectin and IL-15, are associated with improved insulin sensitivity, increased thermogenesis, decreased fat storage, increased muscle regeneration and increased life span (this probably deserves another article).
Finally, in view of the current epidemic of excess estrogen in females and males, caused by estrogenic chemicals and foods (such as petrochemicals and soy), fasting and IF can be used as an effective therapeutic strategy to balance estrogen and prevent related metabolic disorders and cancer.
To sum this up, the female-specific response to fasting or intermittent fasting is no different than the female response to intense exercise. There is indeed a tradeoff between benefits and side effects. And the question "should women fast" raises the same issues as the question "should women exercise intensely".
References:
i Medicine and Science in Sports & Exercise May 2010: 42(5); 998-1003
Sources:
NewHope 360 June 11, 2012
Wednesday, June 20, 2012
anti biotic, the rest of the story
Eating This Feeds Bacteria That Can Poke Holes Through Your Gut
June 20 2012
By Dr. Mercola
Azithromycin (Zithromax) is a macrolide antibiotic used in the treatment of bronchitis, pneumonia, ear infections, and sexually transmitted diseases. It's known for having unpleasant side effects such as skin rashes, itching, allergic or anaphylactic reactions, and severe, watery diarrhea.
But it's also associated with more severe side effects, such as myopathy―muscle and tendon pain, weakness and cramping―when taken in combination with statins i. And previous research has shown that use of any type of antibiotic increases the risk of breast cancer in women ii.
Most recently, research published in the New England Journal of Medicine found that azithromycin increases your chances of dying from a cardiovascular event by a whopping 250 percent within the first five days of usage, compared to those who took amoxicillin iii. This is nearly the same as that for Vioxx, which killed 60,000 people and was voluntarily removed from the market nearly eight years ago.
When researchers looked at people who already had heart problems, their risk of dying while on this drug were even higher. The risk of cardiovascular death was also significantly greater with azithromycin than with ciprofloxacin, while levofloxacin and azithromycin had comparable risks of cardiovascular death.
What You Must Know about Antibiotics
It's important to recognize that antibiotics are indiscriminate bactericidal agents, meaning they kill all bacteria, both beneficial and pathologic, and many of the immediate and long-term side effects are related to this fact. By killing off the beneficial bacteria in your gut, antibiotics have a detrimental effect on your overall immune system, and if you do not "reseed" your gut with probiotics (good bacteria)—either in the form of a probiotics supplement or fermented foods—your immune function can remain compromised for some time.
Hence, antibiotics should only be taken when absolutely necessary, and care must be taken to rebalance your intestinal flora to prevent long-term effects to your health. Taking probiotics while on an antibiotic can also help reduce diarrhea, which is a common side effect.
About 80 percent of your immune system resides in your gastrointestinal tract, which houses 100 trillion bacteria—about two to three pounds worth of bacteria, plus yeasts. You should have about 85 percent "good" bacteria and 15 percent "bad." All of these microbes compete for nutrients from the food you eat, but the strength in numbers that beneficial bacteria enjoy helps keep the bad bacteria and the ever-present yeasts in check, and causes them to produce nutrients your body needs, such as B vitamins.
However, when you introduce antibiotics, these beneficial bacteria are decimated along with the pathogenic ones, thereby upsetting the delicate balance of your intestinal terrain. As a result, yeasts can grow unchecked into large colonies and take over, causing a condition called dysbiosis. Using their tendrils (hyphae), yeast can literally poke holes through the lining of your intestinal wall, which results in a syndrome called leaky gut. At this point, you tend to become increasingly susceptible to a wide variety of health problems, such as:
Arthritis Asthma and allergies Skin problems
Kidney problems Digestive issues Autoimmune disorders
How Your Gut Influences Your Health
The reason why a dysfunctional bowel can wreak such havoc is well-explained by Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride, whose groundbreaking work sheds much needed light on how your gut affects your immune system, and how this dynamic interaction has profound impacts on your overall mental-, emotional-, and physical health.
She has written an excellent book called Gut and Psychology Syndrome, the acronym of which—GAPS—also stands for Gut and Physiology Syndrome, which is the name of a second book currently being written. Dr. Campbell-McBride's GAPS theory eloquently explains how immune abnormalities caused by damaged gut flora are at the root of virtually ALL degenerative diseases, as well as many neurological disorders, including ADHD and autism.
Once your gut becomes porous, or "leaky," it has openings that can allow undigested food particles in. When foods are absorbed in this partially broken down form they're viewed as "foreign," causing your immune system to react to them. Food sensitivities and allergies, digestive issues, and eventually, autoimmune disorders, can all arise as a result.
In addition, parasitic yeasts can also cause you to change what you eat by causing cravings for carbohydrates like sugar, pasta and bread, for example, as this is their preferred fuel. So, it should come as no surprise that weight gain is one of the telltale signs of antibiotic damage and subsequent yeast overgrowth.
Sadly, many doctors dismiss the connection between their patients' intestinal disorders and the drugs they themselves prescribed. So, beware, and always make sure to repopulate your gut with a high quality probiotic every time you use an antibiotic.
Did You Know You May Be Consuming Hidden Antibiotics Daily?!
Unfortunately, the greatest danger posed by antibiotics does not actually come from prescribed courses of antibiotics, which you have some control over, but rather from the food you eat. The prevalence of antibiotics in both meats and vegetables has the potential to throw off, or contribute to this intestinal imbalance.
Animals such as cattle, chickens and hogs raised in confined animal feeding operations (CAFO's) are routinely given antibiotics -- both to keep them alive in stressful, unsanitary conditions, and to make them grow bigger, faster. Antibiotics can also be found in conventionally-grown vegetables, and the reason for this is because antibiotics in livestock end up being transferred, via manure, into the soils that vegetables are then grown in.
The widespread practice of using subtherapeutic doses of antibiotics to increase growth in livestock has been pin-pointed as a leading cause for the development of new strains of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, such as the now-widespread form of staph (MRSA) known as ST398, or "the pig strain" of MRSA.
This livestock-acquired strain of MRSA adds to an already troubling situation... The human community-associated strain of MRSA, USA300, already affects close to 100,000 people a year in the US, and caused 18,600 deaths in 2005 alone iv. To put that number into perspective, HIV/AIDS killed 17,000 people that same year. What's worse, research has shown that various MRSA strains can be transmitted from humans to animals and vice versa v, putting the health of both humans and animals (including pets) at ever increasing risk.
It's important to realize that antibiotic-resistant disease like MRSA is a man-made problem, created by the excessive use of antibiotics. Medical overuse of antibiotics is one aspect, but the greatest, and most hidden, factor is the excessive use of antibiotics in food production.
According to the first-ever report by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on this subject, American factory farms used a whopping 29 million pounds of antibiotics in 2009 alonevi. Back in 2001, a report issued by the Union of Concerned Scientists estimated that the non-therapeutic use of antibiotics in livestock accounted for 70 percent of the total antibiotic use in the US, and when all agricultural uses were considered, they estimated the share could be as high as 84 percent!vii
Clearly, agricultural antibiotic use is the smoking gun in the battle against antibiotic-resistant superbugs. It's also likely a primary cause of chronic poor gut health and reduced immune system function!
FDA Proposes Phase-Out of Antibiotics in Food Production—Sort of...
The rise of antibiotic-resistance in livestock is so alarming that government officials have finally admitted you can become infected when you eat or simply handle infected meat. They also warn that the microbes can contaminate kitchen counters, utensils and other food. Even the USDA, which usually defends agribusiness interests, proclaimed at a 2009 congressional hearing that there is indeed a link between antibiotic use in animals and drug resistance in humans viii.
But the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is still refuses to tackle this issue head on.
In fact, on December 22 last year, the agency quietly posted a notice in the Federal Register that it was effectively reneging on its plan to reduce the use of antibiotics in agricultural animal feed – a plan it has been touting since 1977. Against all logic, and with virtually no public announcement, the FDA decided to continue allowing livestock producers to use the drugs in feed. According to the Federal Register, dated December 22, 2011 ix:
"The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) is withdrawing two 1977 notices of opportunity for a hearing (NOOH), which proposed to withdraw certain approved uses of penicillin and tetracyclines intended for use in feeds for food-producing animals based in part on microbial food safety concerns."
This despite the fact that as recently as 2010, the FDA acknowledged the problem in a draft guidance to industryx, which proposed livestock producers stop using subtherapeutic doses of antibiotics in animal feed, stating that:
"Antimicrobial drugs have been widely used in human and veterinary medicine for more than 50 years … The development of resistance to this important class of drugs, and the resulting loss of their effectiveness as antimicrobial therapies, poses a serious public health threat.
Misuse and overuse of antimicrobial drugs creates selective evolutionary pressure that enables antimicrobial resistant bacteria to increase in numbers more rapidly than antimicrobial susceptible bacteria and thus increases the opportunity for individuals to become infected by resistant bacteria.
Because antimicrobial drug use contributes to the emergence of drug resistant organisms, these important drugs must be used judiciously in both animal and human medicine to slow the development of resistance."
Then, in April of this year, the FDA issued voluntary guidelines suggesting that livestock should only be treated with antibiotics to cure illness, not to enable growth xi. But can we really rely on the honor system with regard to how industry grows our food? I think not. We need measures to ensure antibiotics are used responsibly— and that needs to go beyond mere suggestion.
On a slightly brighter note, in January the FDA announced it would restrict the use of one class of antibiotics, cephalosporin, in cattle, swine, chicken and turkey xii. These antibiotics, which are regularly prescribed to humans, are implicated in the development and spread of drug-resistant bacteria among humans that work with, and eat, the animals. As of April 5, cephalosporin is no longer allowed for use in preventing diseases in livestock, although they will still be allowed for illness treatment in livestock.
How to Protect Your Family from Hidden Antibiotics
Granted, conventional medicine still needs to curtail its prescriptions for antibiotics, but even if you use antibiotics judiciously you're still exposed to significant amounts of antibiotics from the foods you eat. This is one of the primary reasons why I ONLY recommend organic, grass-fed, free-range meats and organic pasture-raised chickens, as non-medical use of antibiotics is not permitted in organic farming. These foods are also far superior to CAFO-raised meats in terms of nutritional content, which you can read more about in this previous article.
Apart from growing and raising your own foods, your best option is to get to know a local farmer—one who uses non-toxic farming methods. If you live in an urban area, there are increasing numbers of community-supported agriculture programs available that offer access to healthy, locally grown foods, even if you live in the heart of the city.
The Weston Price Foundation xiii also has chapters all over the world and many of them are connected with buying clubs in which you can easily purchase these types of foods locally. Another resource you can try is Local Harvest xiv, which you can use to find farmers' markets, family farms, and other sources of safe, sustainably grown food in your area.
References:
i See All References
Sources:
Alliance for Natural Health May 21, 2012
June 20 2012
By Dr. Mercola
Azithromycin (Zithromax) is a macrolide antibiotic used in the treatment of bronchitis, pneumonia, ear infections, and sexually transmitted diseases. It's known for having unpleasant side effects such as skin rashes, itching, allergic or anaphylactic reactions, and severe, watery diarrhea.
But it's also associated with more severe side effects, such as myopathy―muscle and tendon pain, weakness and cramping―when taken in combination with statins i. And previous research has shown that use of any type of antibiotic increases the risk of breast cancer in women ii.
Most recently, research published in the New England Journal of Medicine found that azithromycin increases your chances of dying from a cardiovascular event by a whopping 250 percent within the first five days of usage, compared to those who took amoxicillin iii. This is nearly the same as that for Vioxx, which killed 60,000 people and was voluntarily removed from the market nearly eight years ago.
When researchers looked at people who already had heart problems, their risk of dying while on this drug were even higher. The risk of cardiovascular death was also significantly greater with azithromycin than with ciprofloxacin, while levofloxacin and azithromycin had comparable risks of cardiovascular death.
What You Must Know about Antibiotics
It's important to recognize that antibiotics are indiscriminate bactericidal agents, meaning they kill all bacteria, both beneficial and pathologic, and many of the immediate and long-term side effects are related to this fact. By killing off the beneficial bacteria in your gut, antibiotics have a detrimental effect on your overall immune system, and if you do not "reseed" your gut with probiotics (good bacteria)—either in the form of a probiotics supplement or fermented foods—your immune function can remain compromised for some time.
Hence, antibiotics should only be taken when absolutely necessary, and care must be taken to rebalance your intestinal flora to prevent long-term effects to your health. Taking probiotics while on an antibiotic can also help reduce diarrhea, which is a common side effect.
About 80 percent of your immune system resides in your gastrointestinal tract, which houses 100 trillion bacteria—about two to three pounds worth of bacteria, plus yeasts. You should have about 85 percent "good" bacteria and 15 percent "bad." All of these microbes compete for nutrients from the food you eat, but the strength in numbers that beneficial bacteria enjoy helps keep the bad bacteria and the ever-present yeasts in check, and causes them to produce nutrients your body needs, such as B vitamins.
However, when you introduce antibiotics, these beneficial bacteria are decimated along with the pathogenic ones, thereby upsetting the delicate balance of your intestinal terrain. As a result, yeasts can grow unchecked into large colonies and take over, causing a condition called dysbiosis. Using their tendrils (hyphae), yeast can literally poke holes through the lining of your intestinal wall, which results in a syndrome called leaky gut. At this point, you tend to become increasingly susceptible to a wide variety of health problems, such as:
Arthritis Asthma and allergies Skin problems
Kidney problems Digestive issues Autoimmune disorders
How Your Gut Influences Your Health
The reason why a dysfunctional bowel can wreak such havoc is well-explained by Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride, whose groundbreaking work sheds much needed light on how your gut affects your immune system, and how this dynamic interaction has profound impacts on your overall mental-, emotional-, and physical health.
She has written an excellent book called Gut and Psychology Syndrome, the acronym of which—GAPS—also stands for Gut and Physiology Syndrome, which is the name of a second book currently being written. Dr. Campbell-McBride's GAPS theory eloquently explains how immune abnormalities caused by damaged gut flora are at the root of virtually ALL degenerative diseases, as well as many neurological disorders, including ADHD and autism.
Once your gut becomes porous, or "leaky," it has openings that can allow undigested food particles in. When foods are absorbed in this partially broken down form they're viewed as "foreign," causing your immune system to react to them. Food sensitivities and allergies, digestive issues, and eventually, autoimmune disorders, can all arise as a result.
In addition, parasitic yeasts can also cause you to change what you eat by causing cravings for carbohydrates like sugar, pasta and bread, for example, as this is their preferred fuel. So, it should come as no surprise that weight gain is one of the telltale signs of antibiotic damage and subsequent yeast overgrowth.
Sadly, many doctors dismiss the connection between their patients' intestinal disorders and the drugs they themselves prescribed. So, beware, and always make sure to repopulate your gut with a high quality probiotic every time you use an antibiotic.
Did You Know You May Be Consuming Hidden Antibiotics Daily?!
Unfortunately, the greatest danger posed by antibiotics does not actually come from prescribed courses of antibiotics, which you have some control over, but rather from the food you eat. The prevalence of antibiotics in both meats and vegetables has the potential to throw off, or contribute to this intestinal imbalance.
Animals such as cattle, chickens and hogs raised in confined animal feeding operations (CAFO's) are routinely given antibiotics -- both to keep them alive in stressful, unsanitary conditions, and to make them grow bigger, faster. Antibiotics can also be found in conventionally-grown vegetables, and the reason for this is because antibiotics in livestock end up being transferred, via manure, into the soils that vegetables are then grown in.
The widespread practice of using subtherapeutic doses of antibiotics to increase growth in livestock has been pin-pointed as a leading cause for the development of new strains of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, such as the now-widespread form of staph (MRSA) known as ST398, or "the pig strain" of MRSA.
This livestock-acquired strain of MRSA adds to an already troubling situation... The human community-associated strain of MRSA, USA300, already affects close to 100,000 people a year in the US, and caused 18,600 deaths in 2005 alone iv. To put that number into perspective, HIV/AIDS killed 17,000 people that same year. What's worse, research has shown that various MRSA strains can be transmitted from humans to animals and vice versa v, putting the health of both humans and animals (including pets) at ever increasing risk.
It's important to realize that antibiotic-resistant disease like MRSA is a man-made problem, created by the excessive use of antibiotics. Medical overuse of antibiotics is one aspect, but the greatest, and most hidden, factor is the excessive use of antibiotics in food production.
According to the first-ever report by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on this subject, American factory farms used a whopping 29 million pounds of antibiotics in 2009 alonevi. Back in 2001, a report issued by the Union of Concerned Scientists estimated that the non-therapeutic use of antibiotics in livestock accounted for 70 percent of the total antibiotic use in the US, and when all agricultural uses were considered, they estimated the share could be as high as 84 percent!vii
Clearly, agricultural antibiotic use is the smoking gun in the battle against antibiotic-resistant superbugs. It's also likely a primary cause of chronic poor gut health and reduced immune system function!
FDA Proposes Phase-Out of Antibiotics in Food Production—Sort of...
The rise of antibiotic-resistance in livestock is so alarming that government officials have finally admitted you can become infected when you eat or simply handle infected meat. They also warn that the microbes can contaminate kitchen counters, utensils and other food. Even the USDA, which usually defends agribusiness interests, proclaimed at a 2009 congressional hearing that there is indeed a link between antibiotic use in animals and drug resistance in humans viii.
But the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is still refuses to tackle this issue head on.
In fact, on December 22 last year, the agency quietly posted a notice in the Federal Register that it was effectively reneging on its plan to reduce the use of antibiotics in agricultural animal feed – a plan it has been touting since 1977. Against all logic, and with virtually no public announcement, the FDA decided to continue allowing livestock producers to use the drugs in feed. According to the Federal Register, dated December 22, 2011 ix:
"The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) is withdrawing two 1977 notices of opportunity for a hearing (NOOH), which proposed to withdraw certain approved uses of penicillin and tetracyclines intended for use in feeds for food-producing animals based in part on microbial food safety concerns."
This despite the fact that as recently as 2010, the FDA acknowledged the problem in a draft guidance to industryx, which proposed livestock producers stop using subtherapeutic doses of antibiotics in animal feed, stating that:
"Antimicrobial drugs have been widely used in human and veterinary medicine for more than 50 years … The development of resistance to this important class of drugs, and the resulting loss of their effectiveness as antimicrobial therapies, poses a serious public health threat.
Misuse and overuse of antimicrobial drugs creates selective evolutionary pressure that enables antimicrobial resistant bacteria to increase in numbers more rapidly than antimicrobial susceptible bacteria and thus increases the opportunity for individuals to become infected by resistant bacteria.
Because antimicrobial drug use contributes to the emergence of drug resistant organisms, these important drugs must be used judiciously in both animal and human medicine to slow the development of resistance."
Then, in April of this year, the FDA issued voluntary guidelines suggesting that livestock should only be treated with antibiotics to cure illness, not to enable growth xi. But can we really rely on the honor system with regard to how industry grows our food? I think not. We need measures to ensure antibiotics are used responsibly— and that needs to go beyond mere suggestion.
On a slightly brighter note, in January the FDA announced it would restrict the use of one class of antibiotics, cephalosporin, in cattle, swine, chicken and turkey xii. These antibiotics, which are regularly prescribed to humans, are implicated in the development and spread of drug-resistant bacteria among humans that work with, and eat, the animals. As of April 5, cephalosporin is no longer allowed for use in preventing diseases in livestock, although they will still be allowed for illness treatment in livestock.
How to Protect Your Family from Hidden Antibiotics
Granted, conventional medicine still needs to curtail its prescriptions for antibiotics, but even if you use antibiotics judiciously you're still exposed to significant amounts of antibiotics from the foods you eat. This is one of the primary reasons why I ONLY recommend organic, grass-fed, free-range meats and organic pasture-raised chickens, as non-medical use of antibiotics is not permitted in organic farming. These foods are also far superior to CAFO-raised meats in terms of nutritional content, which you can read more about in this previous article.
Apart from growing and raising your own foods, your best option is to get to know a local farmer—one who uses non-toxic farming methods. If you live in an urban area, there are increasing numbers of community-supported agriculture programs available that offer access to healthy, locally grown foods, even if you live in the heart of the city.
The Weston Price Foundation xiii also has chapters all over the world and many of them are connected with buying clubs in which you can easily purchase these types of foods locally. Another resource you can try is Local Harvest xiv, which you can use to find farmers' markets, family farms, and other sources of safe, sustainably grown food in your area.
References:
i See All References
Sources:
Alliance for Natural Health May 21, 2012
Friday, May 18, 2012
The 6 Types of Pills Big Pharma Wants You Hooked On for Life
Story at-a-glance
In a plea agreement with a federal court, Merck will pay a $321 million fine in exchange for a guilty plea to a misdemeanor for the illegal promotion of Vioxx for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, before it was approved for that use. Vioxx caused the deaths of more than 60,000 people, and was withdrawn from the market in 2004 when it became apparent that it was causing heart attacks
Ghostwritten studies appear to have been relied upon to support Merck’s claim that Vioxx was safe and effective. A 2008 editorial published in JAMA questioned whether Merck might have deliberately manipulated dozens of academic documents published in the medical literature, in order to promote Vioxx under false pretenses
Many drugs are now “marketed for perpetuity,” meaning they’re intended to be taken for life. These include ADHD drugs, antidepressants, statins, hormone replacement therapy, proton pump inhibitors, and asthma-control medicines. Sadly most of these drugs come with potential side effects that can be far worse than your original symptom, and few of them have been definitively proven to actually provide any significant health benefits. In fact, some of these drugs have been found to worsen the very condition they’re meant to treat, and/or cause other serious diseases.
By Dr. Mercola
What would you say if you knew someone had killed 60,000 people? Would you call it a felony of the worst kind, times 60,000? If you totaled up the value of all those lives in criminal court, what would you say they're worth?
Billions? Trillions?
Or—how about a measly $321 million in exchange for a guilty plea to a misdemeanor? When you consider that this involves the second-largest drug maker in the U.S.—Merck—and its deadly drug Vioxx, then you'll probably agree that a misdemeanor and a $321 million fine amounts to nothing more than a slap on the wrist.
Business analysts were estimating a $25 billion judgment when the drug was taken off the market, but even when combined with the $4.85 billion in payouts to patients who suffered heart attacks and strokesi, the final bill is nowhere close to original estimates of the damage.
Yet that's the plea agreement Merck recently made with a federal court in Boston on April 19ii, after being charged with illegal promotion of Vioxx for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, before it was approved for that use.
The sad tale brings up memories of what I tried to warn readers about in 1999, when I showed that people taking this drug were at a massively increased risk of dying from heart disease and stroke. It's tragic that Vioxx was removed only AFTER 60,000 people died.
It's even more tragic that a court would consider Merck's illegal promotion of the drug a misdemeanor rather than a felony, since this tactic clearly exposed far more people to the dangerous drug than it would have otherwise. And, adding insult to injury, instead of the billions that Merck anticipated paying out, it got away with such a paltry sum.
Hired Writers Responsible for Some of Merck's Vioxx Studies?
Particularly galling is the fact that these deaths could have been so easily avoided, were it not for the deceptive maneuvering of parties who stood to profit handsomely from the success of the drug.
Ghostwriting has become an increasingly troublesome problem in the medical science community, and the Vioxx debacle is a perfect example of why ghostwriting medical research is a devious practice that needs to be rooted out.
Merck has previously acknowledged that it has been known to hire professional writers to develop research-related documents that eventually get published under the name of reputable leaders in the medical community. Critics rightfully doubt the validity of such research, and question the actual involvement of the scientists listed as authors of these ghostwritten papers.
Back in 2008, Dr. Joseph S. Ross of New York's Mount Sinai School of Medicine came across ghostwritten research studies for Vioxx while reviewing documents related to lawsuits filed against Merck.
According to an April 16, 2008 article on MedHeadlinesiii:
"In about 96 journal publications, Ross and his colleagues discovered internal Merck documents and e-mail messages pertaining to clinical study reports and review articles, some of which were developed by the company's marketing department, not its scientific department. In others, there is little evidence that the authors recruited for the report made substantial contribution to the research itself. ... Some of the authors listed in the Merck study reports of concern... question the true nature of ghostwriting. One neurologist originally listed as "External author?" and then listed as Dr. Leon J. Thal, of the University of California, San Diego in the final draft, died a year ago in an airplane crash."
An editorial published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA)iv that year by Drs. Psaty and Kronmal also questioned whether Merck might have deliberately manipulated dozens of academic documents published in the medical literature, in order to promote Vioxx under false pretenses.
Blockbuster Drugs Tend to Be More Unnecessary than Others
Vioxx was a so-called blockbuster drug—a designation given to extremely popular drugs that generate a minimum of $1 billion in annual sales. Vioxx was marketed in more than 80 countries, and pulled in $2.5 billion in worldwide sales in 2003 alone (the year before it was pulled from the market due to its heart risks). So despite paying out fines in various lawsuits over the drug, Merck certainly made enough from it to cover all such expenses and still make obscene profits while patients were dying in droves.
An important strategy for creating a true blockbuster drug—at least in the United States—is the use of direct to consumer advertising.
A little over 20 years ago direct-to-consumer advertising for drugs was not allowed in the US. Drug advertising is still illegal in most countries around the world, except for the US. If Big Pharma wanted to sell a product, they had to do it through the person prescribing it—your doctor. If a physician didn't have time to listen to sales reps or attend conferences where new drugs were pushed, well then, sometimes they just didn't get pushed on you.
But ever since drug advertising became legal in the U.S., Big Pharma has been making big bucks selling you pills that not only are expensive, but intended to keep you hooked on them for life. As with most advertised consumer products, drugs with blockbuster potential are not necessarily important life-saving drugs. No, rather than curing actual disease, these drugs tend to be focused on the treatment of symptoms—symptoms that many people tend to experience, and which may or may not be caused by a particular disease...
Oftentimes, symptom complexes will be given official-sounding designations, to make it appear more like an actual disease. Either way, since these types of drugs cannot cure anything, they must be taken indefinitely—until you die or cannot afford them anymore. According to Melody Petersen, author of Our Daily Medsv:
"Most blockbusters are pills for conditions such as anxiety, high cholesterol or constipation that must be taken daily, often for months or years. They are designed for rich Americans who can afford to buy them."
6 Kinds of Pills Big Pharma Tries to Get You Hooked on for Life
There are two effective marketing strategies employed by drug companies on a regular basis, and they include:
Convincing you that drugs you used to take only when you needed them are now everyday "prevention" necessities in the form of a prescription; and
Selling you the idea that just being at risk for a chronic disease makes you someone who should be taking a drug for the disease.
What makes these two strategies so successful is that by seeing the advertisement, YOU are the one who sells it to your doctor, by suggesting that you need a certain drug, or outright asking for it. According to a recent article by Martha Rosenbergvi:
"Since direct-to-consumer drug advertising debuted in the late 1990s, the number of people on prescription drugs -- especially prescription drugs for life -- has ballooned. Between 2001 to 2007 the percentage of adults and children on one or more prescriptions for chronic conditions rose by more than 12 million, reports the Associated Press and 25 percent of US children now take a medication for a chronic conditionvii. Seven percent of kids take two or more daily drugs.
Who says advertising doesn't work? Of the top-selling drugs in 2011viii, led by Lipitor, Nexium, Plavix, Advair Diskus, Abilify, Seroquel, Singulair and Crestor, none is taken occasionally, or "as needed" and the treatment goal is never to get off the drug, like an antibiotic."
She lists six types of drugs that are "marketed for perpetuity," meaning they're intended to be taken for life. Sadly most of these drugs come with potential side effects that can be far worse than your original symptom, and few of them have been definitively proven to actually provide any significant health benefits. In fact, some of these drugs have been found to worsen the very condition they're meant to treat (such as antidepressants, statins, proton pump inhibitors, and asthma-control meds), and/or cause other serious diseases. For more information, please follow the hyperlinks provided:
ADHD Drugs and Drugs for Pediatric Psychopathologies, such as "pediatric bipolar disorder"
Antidepressants
Statins
Hormone Replacement Therapy Proton Pump Inhibitors (PPIs) Asthma-Control Medicines
Bribery, Fraud, and Deception Hurts YOU in More Ways than One...
Unfortunately, all of this medical deception (and at times outright fraud) is part and parcel of a much larger problem: the near unchecked system of corporate bribery that drives our political processes.
The pharmaceutical industry is the BIGGEST political lobby in the U.S.. There should be no doubt about the power the drug industry wields in shaping the U.S. health care system and all the laws relating to the industry. Political lobbying is one of the primary reasons why the drug companies control nearly the entire health industry, and why alternative medicine is under such constant legislative attack. For greater insight into this problem, please review this previous article, featuring a 60-Minutes segment with Jack Abramoff, a former lobbyist.
In recent news, we get further indications of how pervasive lobbying fraud and illegalities are.
In a submission to the Internal Revenue Service under the Tax Whistleblower Act, a nonpartisan advocacy organization, Common Causeix, has exposed what amounts to a tax scam run by a legislative group known as ALEC, for some of American's largest companies. ALEC stands for the American Legislative Exchange Council, which describes as a public-private partnership between member legislators and business leaders.
According to legal papers filed with the IRS, Common Cause believes that ALEC's lobbying efforts for "model" legislation are tailored to boost the profits of its corporate members—a violation of its tax-exempt status. While ALEC claims it doesn't do lobbying, the Huffington Post reports that at least one state, South Carolina, has written a special exemption for ALEC so it can engage in a type of lobbying. The whistleblower letter to the IRS reads in part:
"... This matter concerns the massive underreporting of lobbying by the American Legislative Exchange Council ("ALEC"). While ostensibly a nonprofit organization under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, ALEC's primary purpose is to provide a vehicle for its corporate members to lobby state legislators and to deduct the costs of such efforts as charitable contributions. ALEC drafts "model" legislation provided by its corporate and legislative members, and lobbies for the adoption of that legislation. These goals are fundamentally inconsistent with ALEC's claimed tax-exempt status as a charitable organization under 26 U.S.C. § 501(c)(3), because (i) "no substantial part" of a charity's activity can be "attempting to influence legislation," and (ii) ALEC's activities do not qualify under any of the enumerated purposes of Section 501(c)(3).
This scheme causes harm to taxpayers in two distinct ways. First, ALEC's activities constitute an abuse of its 501(c)(3) tax exemption, which is reserved for organizations "operated exclusively " for a limited number of purposes, such as "religious, charitable, scientific ... or educational purposes ...." 26 U.S.C. § 501(c)(3).
Second, ALEC's corporate members improperly deduct from their taxable income the dues and other contributions made to ALEC; such expenditures are non-deductible lobbying expenses under Section 162(e). In fact, because ALEC solicits very few contributions from individuals, its false claims of tax-exempt status appear driven by the desire of ALEC corporate members to deduct lobbying expenses as charitable contributions..."
Why are Soldiers Dying in Their Sleep?
While lobbying may have its place—when done in a transparent and legal way to inform legislators, and not to simply buy their votes by any means necessary—the practice has deteriorated to the point that it is endangering the health and welfare of people everywhere. Dangerous drugs are brought to market and used in lieu of harmless alternatives, and polypharmacy, the taking of too many drugs, is becoming ever more dangerous.
A case in point is the growing problem of U.S. soldiers literally dying in their sleep...
They survived the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. But instead of bombs and guns, a growing number of U.S. veterans of these wars, whether they're still deployed or back at home, are being downed by something else. They die in different ways but they all have one thing in common—at the time of their deaths they're on a cocktail of drugs prescribed for them by military doctors.
Video description: CNN Reports on military personnel dying from drug toxicity.
Such deaths have been occurring for years, but they were recently brought to light by a West Virginia couple who shared the story of their son, Andrew White, with ABC News. Andrew died in 2008 of fatal drug intoxication. The Whites blame the prescriptions their son was on for his death. According to a report by ABC11x:
""We call it the lethal cocktail. It's antidepressants, antipsychotics and analgesics. It's just overloading, and your body can't take it," Stan [White] explained. The Whites said Andrew was taking Seroquel, Klonopin, and Paxil. They still have the pills prescribed by Veteran's Administration doctors to treat Andrew's post-traumatic stress disorder... "He made that choice to trust the VA and that trust cost him his life," [Mrs. White] continued."
The twist to the story is that within weeks of Andrew's death, three other war veterans—all of whom were taking the same drugs Andrew was on—also died in their sleep. It seemed like too much of a coincidence to San Diego neurologist Dr. Fred Baughman, so he combed newspaper articles and obituaries and created a list of 300 military deaths linked to sudden cardiac arrest. Surprisingly, they were all men in their 20's, many of whom died quietly in their beds. According to Dr. Baughman, these deaths appear to be caused by the antipsychotics and antidepressants these young men were all taking.
Just weeks before White died, U.S. Surgeon General Eric B. Schoomaker had also publicly acknowledged that the military was experiencing a series of deaths that "often (were) a consequence of the use of multiple prescription and nonprescription medicines and alcohol." Antipsychotics and antidepressants have been linked to many of the deaths. Another family who has stepped forward with their story is John and Mary Nahas, who nearly lost their son Michael after he returned from Iraq. ABC11 reports:
"Look at all the drugs they had him on," Mary said, showing ABC11 cameras a list that includes Oxycodone, Xanax, Percocet, Klonopin, Celexa, Lunesta, and Ambien.
"I ran the list of medications by my niece - who was a psychologist in a psychiatric hospital - and she said: 'Oh Mary, that's a cocktail of death, they're trying to kill him,'" said Mary. "When they returned our son to us, he looked like a concentration camp victim. He was thin. He was gray in color," she continued. The Nahas say the medication prescribed for their son's PTSD made him attempt suicide."We noticed a decline in his personality from the drugs. They change cognition and behavior. We noticed anger, just couldn't think straight," said Mary. "The drugs had messed him up so badly."
The Veterans Administration investigated Andrew White's death and ruled that his doctors had done nothing wrong, as they met "the community standards of care." Sadly, just as with conventional cancer treatment, the "standard of care" is oftentimes just as deadly as the disease... Still, the White's are pushing for a Congressional investigation into the overmedication of military service personnel. They want VA doctors to reduce their reliance on toxic drugs, and focus on other therapies such as counseling and outdoor activities.
I couldn't agree more.
There's a mountain of evidence supporting the use of such alternatives, and there's very strong evidence that some alternative treatments, such as exercise, are FAR more effective than any of the drugs currently in use. For more information about this, please listen to my interview with Robert Whitaker, author of Mad in America, and Anatomy of an Epidemic: Magic Bullets, Psychiatric Drugs and the Astonishing Rise of Mental Illness in America.
References:
i The New York Times November 10, 2007
ii Reuters April 19, 2012
iii MedHeadlines April 16, 2008
ivJAMA 2008;299(15):1813-1817
v AlterNet April 26, 2012
vi AlterNet April 26, 2012
vii The Wall Street Journal December 28, 2010
viii Forbes Magazine April 19, 2011
ix Common Cause April 20, 2012
x WTVD-TV Raleigh-Durham April 26, 2012
Sources:
Reuters April 19, 2012
In a plea agreement with a federal court, Merck will pay a $321 million fine in exchange for a guilty plea to a misdemeanor for the illegal promotion of Vioxx for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, before it was approved for that use. Vioxx caused the deaths of more than 60,000 people, and was withdrawn from the market in 2004 when it became apparent that it was causing heart attacks
Ghostwritten studies appear to have been relied upon to support Merck’s claim that Vioxx was safe and effective. A 2008 editorial published in JAMA questioned whether Merck might have deliberately manipulated dozens of academic documents published in the medical literature, in order to promote Vioxx under false pretenses
Many drugs are now “marketed for perpetuity,” meaning they’re intended to be taken for life. These include ADHD drugs, antidepressants, statins, hormone replacement therapy, proton pump inhibitors, and asthma-control medicines. Sadly most of these drugs come with potential side effects that can be far worse than your original symptom, and few of them have been definitively proven to actually provide any significant health benefits. In fact, some of these drugs have been found to worsen the very condition they’re meant to treat, and/or cause other serious diseases.
By Dr. Mercola
What would you say if you knew someone had killed 60,000 people? Would you call it a felony of the worst kind, times 60,000? If you totaled up the value of all those lives in criminal court, what would you say they're worth?
Billions? Trillions?
Or—how about a measly $321 million in exchange for a guilty plea to a misdemeanor? When you consider that this involves the second-largest drug maker in the U.S.—Merck—and its deadly drug Vioxx, then you'll probably agree that a misdemeanor and a $321 million fine amounts to nothing more than a slap on the wrist.
Business analysts were estimating a $25 billion judgment when the drug was taken off the market, but even when combined with the $4.85 billion in payouts to patients who suffered heart attacks and strokesi, the final bill is nowhere close to original estimates of the damage.
Yet that's the plea agreement Merck recently made with a federal court in Boston on April 19ii, after being charged with illegal promotion of Vioxx for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, before it was approved for that use.
The sad tale brings up memories of what I tried to warn readers about in 1999, when I showed that people taking this drug were at a massively increased risk of dying from heart disease and stroke. It's tragic that Vioxx was removed only AFTER 60,000 people died.
It's even more tragic that a court would consider Merck's illegal promotion of the drug a misdemeanor rather than a felony, since this tactic clearly exposed far more people to the dangerous drug than it would have otherwise. And, adding insult to injury, instead of the billions that Merck anticipated paying out, it got away with such a paltry sum.
Hired Writers Responsible for Some of Merck's Vioxx Studies?
Particularly galling is the fact that these deaths could have been so easily avoided, were it not for the deceptive maneuvering of parties who stood to profit handsomely from the success of the drug.
Ghostwriting has become an increasingly troublesome problem in the medical science community, and the Vioxx debacle is a perfect example of why ghostwriting medical research is a devious practice that needs to be rooted out.
Merck has previously acknowledged that it has been known to hire professional writers to develop research-related documents that eventually get published under the name of reputable leaders in the medical community. Critics rightfully doubt the validity of such research, and question the actual involvement of the scientists listed as authors of these ghostwritten papers.
Back in 2008, Dr. Joseph S. Ross of New York's Mount Sinai School of Medicine came across ghostwritten research studies for Vioxx while reviewing documents related to lawsuits filed against Merck.
According to an April 16, 2008 article on MedHeadlinesiii:
"In about 96 journal publications, Ross and his colleagues discovered internal Merck documents and e-mail messages pertaining to clinical study reports and review articles, some of which were developed by the company's marketing department, not its scientific department. In others, there is little evidence that the authors recruited for the report made substantial contribution to the research itself. ... Some of the authors listed in the Merck study reports of concern... question the true nature of ghostwriting. One neurologist originally listed as "External author?" and then listed as Dr. Leon J. Thal, of the University of California, San Diego in the final draft, died a year ago in an airplane crash."
An editorial published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA)iv that year by Drs. Psaty and Kronmal also questioned whether Merck might have deliberately manipulated dozens of academic documents published in the medical literature, in order to promote Vioxx under false pretenses.
Blockbuster Drugs Tend to Be More Unnecessary than Others
Vioxx was a so-called blockbuster drug—a designation given to extremely popular drugs that generate a minimum of $1 billion in annual sales. Vioxx was marketed in more than 80 countries, and pulled in $2.5 billion in worldwide sales in 2003 alone (the year before it was pulled from the market due to its heart risks). So despite paying out fines in various lawsuits over the drug, Merck certainly made enough from it to cover all such expenses and still make obscene profits while patients were dying in droves.
An important strategy for creating a true blockbuster drug—at least in the United States—is the use of direct to consumer advertising.
A little over 20 years ago direct-to-consumer advertising for drugs was not allowed in the US. Drug advertising is still illegal in most countries around the world, except for the US. If Big Pharma wanted to sell a product, they had to do it through the person prescribing it—your doctor. If a physician didn't have time to listen to sales reps or attend conferences where new drugs were pushed, well then, sometimes they just didn't get pushed on you.
But ever since drug advertising became legal in the U.S., Big Pharma has been making big bucks selling you pills that not only are expensive, but intended to keep you hooked on them for life. As with most advertised consumer products, drugs with blockbuster potential are not necessarily important life-saving drugs. No, rather than curing actual disease, these drugs tend to be focused on the treatment of symptoms—symptoms that many people tend to experience, and which may or may not be caused by a particular disease...
Oftentimes, symptom complexes will be given official-sounding designations, to make it appear more like an actual disease. Either way, since these types of drugs cannot cure anything, they must be taken indefinitely—until you die or cannot afford them anymore. According to Melody Petersen, author of Our Daily Medsv:
"Most blockbusters are pills for conditions such as anxiety, high cholesterol or constipation that must be taken daily, often for months or years. They are designed for rich Americans who can afford to buy them."
6 Kinds of Pills Big Pharma Tries to Get You Hooked on for Life
There are two effective marketing strategies employed by drug companies on a regular basis, and they include:
Convincing you that drugs you used to take only when you needed them are now everyday "prevention" necessities in the form of a prescription; and
Selling you the idea that just being at risk for a chronic disease makes you someone who should be taking a drug for the disease.
What makes these two strategies so successful is that by seeing the advertisement, YOU are the one who sells it to your doctor, by suggesting that you need a certain drug, or outright asking for it. According to a recent article by Martha Rosenbergvi:
"Since direct-to-consumer drug advertising debuted in the late 1990s, the number of people on prescription drugs -- especially prescription drugs for life -- has ballooned. Between 2001 to 2007 the percentage of adults and children on one or more prescriptions for chronic conditions rose by more than 12 million, reports the Associated Press and 25 percent of US children now take a medication for a chronic conditionvii. Seven percent of kids take two or more daily drugs.
Who says advertising doesn't work? Of the top-selling drugs in 2011viii, led by Lipitor, Nexium, Plavix, Advair Diskus, Abilify, Seroquel, Singulair and Crestor, none is taken occasionally, or "as needed" and the treatment goal is never to get off the drug, like an antibiotic."
She lists six types of drugs that are "marketed for perpetuity," meaning they're intended to be taken for life. Sadly most of these drugs come with potential side effects that can be far worse than your original symptom, and few of them have been definitively proven to actually provide any significant health benefits. In fact, some of these drugs have been found to worsen the very condition they're meant to treat (such as antidepressants, statins, proton pump inhibitors, and asthma-control meds), and/or cause other serious diseases. For more information, please follow the hyperlinks provided:
ADHD Drugs and Drugs for Pediatric Psychopathologies, such as "pediatric bipolar disorder"
Antidepressants
Statins
Hormone Replacement Therapy Proton Pump Inhibitors (PPIs) Asthma-Control Medicines
Bribery, Fraud, and Deception Hurts YOU in More Ways than One...
Unfortunately, all of this medical deception (and at times outright fraud) is part and parcel of a much larger problem: the near unchecked system of corporate bribery that drives our political processes.
The pharmaceutical industry is the BIGGEST political lobby in the U.S.. There should be no doubt about the power the drug industry wields in shaping the U.S. health care system and all the laws relating to the industry. Political lobbying is one of the primary reasons why the drug companies control nearly the entire health industry, and why alternative medicine is under such constant legislative attack. For greater insight into this problem, please review this previous article, featuring a 60-Minutes segment with Jack Abramoff, a former lobbyist.
In recent news, we get further indications of how pervasive lobbying fraud and illegalities are.
In a submission to the Internal Revenue Service under the Tax Whistleblower Act, a nonpartisan advocacy organization, Common Causeix, has exposed what amounts to a tax scam run by a legislative group known as ALEC, for some of American's largest companies. ALEC stands for the American Legislative Exchange Council, which describes as a public-private partnership between member legislators and business leaders.
According to legal papers filed with the IRS, Common Cause believes that ALEC's lobbying efforts for "model" legislation are tailored to boost the profits of its corporate members—a violation of its tax-exempt status. While ALEC claims it doesn't do lobbying, the Huffington Post reports that at least one state, South Carolina, has written a special exemption for ALEC so it can engage in a type of lobbying. The whistleblower letter to the IRS reads in part:
"... This matter concerns the massive underreporting of lobbying by the American Legislative Exchange Council ("ALEC"). While ostensibly a nonprofit organization under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, ALEC's primary purpose is to provide a vehicle for its corporate members to lobby state legislators and to deduct the costs of such efforts as charitable contributions. ALEC drafts "model" legislation provided by its corporate and legislative members, and lobbies for the adoption of that legislation. These goals are fundamentally inconsistent with ALEC's claimed tax-exempt status as a charitable organization under 26 U.S.C. § 501(c)(3), because (i) "no substantial part" of a charity's activity can be "attempting to influence legislation," and (ii) ALEC's activities do not qualify under any of the enumerated purposes of Section 501(c)(3).
This scheme causes harm to taxpayers in two distinct ways. First, ALEC's activities constitute an abuse of its 501(c)(3) tax exemption, which is reserved for organizations "operated exclusively " for a limited number of purposes, such as "religious, charitable, scientific ... or educational purposes ...." 26 U.S.C. § 501(c)(3).
Second, ALEC's corporate members improperly deduct from their taxable income the dues and other contributions made to ALEC; such expenditures are non-deductible lobbying expenses under Section 162(e). In fact, because ALEC solicits very few contributions from individuals, its false claims of tax-exempt status appear driven by the desire of ALEC corporate members to deduct lobbying expenses as charitable contributions..."
Why are Soldiers Dying in Their Sleep?
While lobbying may have its place—when done in a transparent and legal way to inform legislators, and not to simply buy their votes by any means necessary—the practice has deteriorated to the point that it is endangering the health and welfare of people everywhere. Dangerous drugs are brought to market and used in lieu of harmless alternatives, and polypharmacy, the taking of too many drugs, is becoming ever more dangerous.
A case in point is the growing problem of U.S. soldiers literally dying in their sleep...
They survived the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. But instead of bombs and guns, a growing number of U.S. veterans of these wars, whether they're still deployed or back at home, are being downed by something else. They die in different ways but they all have one thing in common—at the time of their deaths they're on a cocktail of drugs prescribed for them by military doctors.
Video description: CNN Reports on military personnel dying from drug toxicity.
Such deaths have been occurring for years, but they were recently brought to light by a West Virginia couple who shared the story of their son, Andrew White, with ABC News. Andrew died in 2008 of fatal drug intoxication. The Whites blame the prescriptions their son was on for his death. According to a report by ABC11x:
""We call it the lethal cocktail. It's antidepressants, antipsychotics and analgesics. It's just overloading, and your body can't take it," Stan [White] explained. The Whites said Andrew was taking Seroquel, Klonopin, and Paxil. They still have the pills prescribed by Veteran's Administration doctors to treat Andrew's post-traumatic stress disorder... "He made that choice to trust the VA and that trust cost him his life," [Mrs. White] continued."
The twist to the story is that within weeks of Andrew's death, three other war veterans—all of whom were taking the same drugs Andrew was on—also died in their sleep. It seemed like too much of a coincidence to San Diego neurologist Dr. Fred Baughman, so he combed newspaper articles and obituaries and created a list of 300 military deaths linked to sudden cardiac arrest. Surprisingly, they were all men in their 20's, many of whom died quietly in their beds. According to Dr. Baughman, these deaths appear to be caused by the antipsychotics and antidepressants these young men were all taking.
Just weeks before White died, U.S. Surgeon General Eric B. Schoomaker had also publicly acknowledged that the military was experiencing a series of deaths that "often (were) a consequence of the use of multiple prescription and nonprescription medicines and alcohol." Antipsychotics and antidepressants have been linked to many of the deaths. Another family who has stepped forward with their story is John and Mary Nahas, who nearly lost their son Michael after he returned from Iraq. ABC11 reports:
"Look at all the drugs they had him on," Mary said, showing ABC11 cameras a list that includes Oxycodone, Xanax, Percocet, Klonopin, Celexa, Lunesta, and Ambien.
"I ran the list of medications by my niece - who was a psychologist in a psychiatric hospital - and she said: 'Oh Mary, that's a cocktail of death, they're trying to kill him,'" said Mary. "When they returned our son to us, he looked like a concentration camp victim. He was thin. He was gray in color," she continued. The Nahas say the medication prescribed for their son's PTSD made him attempt suicide."We noticed a decline in his personality from the drugs. They change cognition and behavior. We noticed anger, just couldn't think straight," said Mary. "The drugs had messed him up so badly."
The Veterans Administration investigated Andrew White's death and ruled that his doctors had done nothing wrong, as they met "the community standards of care." Sadly, just as with conventional cancer treatment, the "standard of care" is oftentimes just as deadly as the disease... Still, the White's are pushing for a Congressional investigation into the overmedication of military service personnel. They want VA doctors to reduce their reliance on toxic drugs, and focus on other therapies such as counseling and outdoor activities.
I couldn't agree more.
There's a mountain of evidence supporting the use of such alternatives, and there's very strong evidence that some alternative treatments, such as exercise, are FAR more effective than any of the drugs currently in use. For more information about this, please listen to my interview with Robert Whitaker, author of Mad in America, and Anatomy of an Epidemic: Magic Bullets, Psychiatric Drugs and the Astonishing Rise of Mental Illness in America.
References:
i The New York Times November 10, 2007
ii Reuters April 19, 2012
iii MedHeadlines April 16, 2008
ivJAMA 2008;299(15):1813-1817
v AlterNet April 26, 2012
vi AlterNet April 26, 2012
vii The Wall Street Journal December 28, 2010
viii Forbes Magazine April 19, 2011
ix Common Cause April 20, 2012
x WTVD-TV Raleigh-Durham April 26, 2012
Sources:
Reuters April 19, 2012
Saturday, May 12, 2012
Sneaky company, caught
Massive Social Outrage at ‘Natural’ Cereal Maker Abusing the Term
A note on a Rhode Island grocer’s shelf has gone viral, informing consumers everywhere that the popular “natural” cereal brand Kashi actually contains genetically engineered grains
As a result of consumer outrage, the Kashi brand, which is owned by Kellogg Company, has now pledged to use at least 70 percent certified organic ingredients by 2015—a move that may be too little, too late for many health conscious consumers. The pledge came just days after initially trying to further mislead consumers by denying the test results, which had found Kashi GoLean cereal contained 100 percent genetically engineered soy
Currently, the ONLY label that can protect you against genetically engineered ingredients, synthetic pesticides, and other harmful additives is the USDA 100% Organic label
By Dr. Mercola
A simple sign on a grocery store shelf has gone viral, causing a storm of outrage among consumers who feel they’ve been misled by cereal maker Kellogg’s claims about its Kashi cereals. A Rhode Island grocer posted a note on the shelf where Kashi was supposed to be, saying he’d learned it wasn’t 100 percent natural after all, and therefore wasn’t carrying it anymore.
It turns out the soy in Kashi cereals comes from genetically modified Roundup-ready soybeans, which have a gene inserted in them that allows the crop to withstand otherwise lethal doses of the weed killer.
USA Today reported that consumers felt duped into believing that Kashi was all-natural when it’s noti. Their complaints were initially brushed off by Kashi general Manager David DeSouza, who told USA Today that since the FDA doesn’t regulate the term “natural,” the cereal maker has done nothing wrong by defining “natural” as minimally-processed with no artificial flavors, colors, preservatives or sweeteners.
Were You Duped by Kashi’s Wholesome Brand Identity?
People generally tend to believe that the word “natural” refers to foods grown “in a natural way,” which really amounts to organic farming methods, or close to it; sans harsh chemicals, and most definitely not something that has been genetically engineered. Unfortunately, that’s not what the “natural” label represents at all. In fact, the “natural” label is unregulated, and companies can define it as they please.
But most food manufacturers are well aware of this general misperception of what the label means, and frequently misuse it to lure health conscious consumers into spending more. This is known as “green-washing” and it certainly applies in this case.
Adding insult to injury, the company appears to have made a poor attempt to save face by further misleading consumers about the accuracy of the information that led the Rhode Island grocer to not carry the Kashi brand anymore.
The Cornucopia Institute released a report, Cereal Crimes, back in November of last yearii, which details the presence of genetically engineered grains in a number of leading “natural” cereal brands, including Kellogg’s Kashi brand. Shockingly, many of the products tested were found to contain high amounts of genetically engineered grains—some, including Kashi, containing 100 percent genetically engineered grains! The report also mentions a class action lawsuit filed against Kellogg/Kashi on August 31, 2011, "for allegedly misleading consumers with its "natural" claims. One Kashi® product in particular, GoLean® Shakes, is composed almost entirely of synthetic and unnaturally processed ingredients, according to the plaintiff."
The report contrasts these findings with tests of certified organic cereal products, which by law are not allowed to contain any genetically engineered ingredients or synthetic pesticides. While some were found to be mildly contaminated with genetically engineered ingredients, overall, the report highlights the fact that the ONLY way to ensure you’re not buying a genetically engineered product is to buy a product bearing the USDA 100% Organic label.
When Greenwashing Attempts Finally Backfire...
Once the grocer’s sign went viral and angry consumers began overloading the Kashi telephone lines, the company switched to a recorded message stating they were temporarily unable to accept calls. Then, according to an April 26 report by Cornucopia Instituteiii:
“When the company again began accepting calls, a Kashi consumer affairs employee, Rick Duran, told a Cornucopia staff member that “no actual testing” of their cereal products had been performed. This mimicked the analysis also offered in a response by the company in an online video posted that same afternoon on the Kashi Facebook page. The video spokesperson called Cornucopia’s information “scientifically inaccurate and misleading because it was not based on actual testing of Kashi products.”
“This characterization of our work by Kashi is blatantly false,” said Will Fantle, Cornucopia’s Research Director. “We purchased a readily available box of Kashi’s GoLean® cereal from a Whole Foods store. We then sent a sample to an accredited national lab for testing, finding that the soy in the natural cereal was 100% GMO.”
The Kashi video also suggested, disingenuously, that any genetically engineered contamination in their food was from incidental sources rather than crops intentionally grown from GMO seed. While acknowledging that over 80% of the soybeans grown in North America are GMO, they explain that, “practices in agricultural storage, handling, and shipping, have lead to an environment where GMOs are not sufficiently controlled.”
“This is classic public relations spin and crisis communications work, where corporations use misinformation to try to cover their tracks,” said Rebekah Wilce, of the Center for Media and Democracy/PRWatch, which helps expose corporate PR tactics...”
Three days later, the USA Today reportediv:
“... Kellogg got itself into trouble by "not being entirely transparent," says Roger Nyhus, president of Nyhus Communications in Seattle. He sees a trend among some companies "of fudging language to allay consumer concerns and jump on the green bandwagon, and I think it's starting to backfire." ... Kashi's DeSouza says that by 2015, all new Kashi products will "contain at least 70 percent USDA organic certified ingredients."
So, in a matter of days, Kashi ended up backpedaling as their initial attempt to discredit the Cornucopia Institute’s test results backfired, and now the company has agreed to ensure their products will, within the next three years, contain at least 70 percent certified organic ingredients. While this is probably not going to be enough for most health conscious consumers, Kashi’s pledge is at least a good demonstration of the power of consumer education, and that consumers ultimately have the power to influence even the largest of food companies. After all, they can only sell what you’re willing to buy!
“Natural” Label is Frequently Misused to Lure Health Conscious Consumers
The misuse of the term "natural" by companies who simply pay lip service to sustainability and the organic movement undermines companies that are truly sincere in their efforts to bring you eco-friendly, unadulterated, safe foods.
And companies like Kashi cannot rightfully claim ignorance about the impact the word “natural” has—marketing firm polls have shown that more people respond favorably to the “all-natural” label than the organic label! It’s a powerful word that conjures up wholesomeness in most people’s minds. Marketing terms such as “natural” are certainly not chosen willy-nilly. No, they’re selected based on what works and what sells. As illustrated by this market research summary by The Hartman Groupv:
“Consumer understanding and shopping behavior of organic and natural foods and beverages continues to change and evolve. Today’s consumers are confused, yet continue to be engaged by the vast array of products, messages, symbols and labels they encounter when making decisions about what to eat or drink and where they shop.
... This study will identify the hierarchy among these attributes and point out differences by product category as well as deeper distinctions between “organic” and “natural” themselves. It will enable companies to go beyond the clutter of product call-outs to have a singular focus on what matters most to consumers thereby increasing brand loyalty and likelihood of purchase”
According to a 2010 Hartman Group poll, more than 60 percent of consumers erroneously believe that the "natural" label implies or suggests the absence of genetically engineered ingredients, so Kashi’s statement that there’s nothing wrong with using genetically engineered ingredients in their “natural” products is rather weak. Food companies know this misconception exists, and they actively prey on consumers’ assumptions. Fortunately, the Cornucopia Institute’s report has awakened many to this sad truth. As one now-former Kashi consumer stated on the company’s Facebook page:
“Yours is the only brand cereal I have bought for years. Not anymore! You are despicable. Everything you supposedly stand for is a lie.”
The Difference Between Natural and Organic
It’s important to understand that the “natural” label is not regulated and does not provide a guarantee of being free of genetically engineered ingredients or synthetic pesticides and additives. Currently, the ONLY label that can protect you against genetically engineered ingredients and other unsavory additives is the USDA 100% Organic label.
The USDA's National Organic Program (NOP) took effect October 21, 2002, and regulates the standards for any farm, wild crop harvesting, or handling operation that wants to sell an agricultural product as organically produced. The labeling requirements of the NOP apply to raw, fresh products and processed products that contain organic agricultural ingredientsvi. In order to qualify as organic, a product must be grown and processed using organic farming methods that recycle resources and promote biodiversity.
Crops must be grown without synthetic pesticides, bioengineered genes, petroleum-based fertilizers, or sewage sludge-based fertilizersvii. Organic livestock must have access to the outdoors and cannot be given antibiotics or growth hormones.
Products labeled "USDA 100% organic" must contain only organically produced materials
Products labeled simply "USDA organic" must contain at least 95 percent organic ingredients, whereas
The label "made with organic ingredients" can contain anywhere between 70 to 95 percent organic ingredients
Organic products cannot be irradiated, are not allowed to contain preservatives or flavor enhancing chemicals, nor can they contain traces of heavy metals or other contaminants in excess of tolerances set by the FDAviii. Additionally, the pesticide residue level cannot be higher than 5 percent of the maximum EPA pesticide toleranceix. For the complete National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances under the USDA organic label, see this linkx. To learn more about organic foods and the findings detailed in the Cereal Crimes report, please listen to my interview with Mark Kastel of the Cornucopia Institute.
Download Interview Transcript
The Non-GMO Project Verified Seal
There’s yet another label you need to be aware of, and that is the Non-GMO project’s seal . The Non-GMO Project is a non-profit organization “committed to preserving and building sources of non-GMO products, educating consumers, and providing verified non-GMO choices.”
It’s very important to understand that brands are registered with the Project without being independently lab tested. All they have to do is affirm that their intention is to provide foods that are free of genetically engineered ingredients.
Unfortunately, as the Cereal Crimes report showed, even some products enrolled in the Non-GMO Project, were found to contain genetically engineered ingredients. Barbara's Bakery's Puffins and Whole Foods' 365® Corn Flakes both contained more than 50 percent genetically engineered corn. Meanwhile, the control, Nature's Path® USDA certified organic corn flakes, contained only trace amounts of contamination (less than 0.5 percent genetically engineered corn).
Mom Stands Up to Monsanto and Wins Major Environmental Award
Genetically engineered foods do not just pose a health hazard for those consuming them. GE crops also threaten the health of the environment and those living in GE farming communities, due to the heavy use of pesticides required to grow these crops.
A woman in Argentina who was instrumental in getting the president of Argentina to investigate the connection between pesticide use and the incidence of cancer and other devastating illnesses and deaths in her town has been awarded the 2012 Goldman Environmental Prize—the world’s largest prize honoring grassroots environmentalists. The Goldman recognizes unsung heroes who often take great personal risks to work to protect the world’s natural resources and human lives.
Thirteen years ago Sofia Gatica gave birth to a daughter who died three days later of kidney failure. Determined to learn what killed her child, she learned that the people in her working-class neighborhood, surrounded by genetically engineered soy fields and subjected to regular insecticide spraying, were plagued with unexplained health issues including high rates of neurological and respiratory diseases, birth defects, and infant mortality. Even though she faced an uphill battle and death threats, Gatica succeeded in getting a municipal ordinance passed prohibiting aerial spraying around her town. Argentina’s Supreme Court followed with a ruling that not only banned chemical spraying near populated areas, but ordered the government and soy producers to prove the chemicals are safe.
The Devastating Health Effects of Roundup
As of July 2013, Argentina will no longer allow the use of endulsofan, an off-patent organochlorine insecticide, and Gatica is currently involved with an effort to enact a nationwide ban on glyphosate as well. Glyphosate is the active ingredient in Monsanto’s broad-spectrum herbicide Roundup, which is used on all genetically engineered Roundup-Ready crops, which have been genetically altered to withstand otherwise lethal doses of the chemical.
Glyphosate is easily one of the world's most overlooked poisons. Research published in 2010 showed that the chemical, which works by inhibiting an enzyme called EPSP synthase that is necessary for plants to grow, causes birth defects in frogs and chicken embryos at far lower levels than used in agricultural and garden applications . The malformations primarily affected the:
Skull
Face
Midline and developing brain
Spinal cord
The amount of glyphosate residue you can be exposed to through food is remarkably high, in terms of being close to the maximum residue limit (MRL) allowed. According to a report in the journal Chemical Research in Toxicology, the highest MRL for glyphosate in food and feed products in the EU is 20 mg/kg. Genetically engineered soybeans have been found to contain residue levels as high as 17 mg/kg, and malformations in frog and chicken embryos occurred at 2.03 mg/kg! That's 10 times lower than the MRL. Other independent scientific research has also found that glyphosate has the potential to cause grave health damage, including a 2009 study that tested formulations of Roundup that were highly diluted (up to 100,000 times or more) on human cells, and even then the cells died within 24 hours.
Why We MUST Insist on Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods
Labeling may be the only way to stop the proliferation of genetically engineered foods in the US, but simple petitions will likely fail. We strongly support state initiatives, such as California's ballot initiative to require labeling for genetically engineered foods sold in their state. A coalition of consumer, public health and environmental organizations, food companies, and individuals has already submitted the California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act to the State Attorney General, and thousands of volunteers have done an outstanding job collecting the required signatures.
Now, the campaign needs funding. Needless to say, it's going to be an enormous battle, as the biotech industry will outspend us by 100 to 1, if not more, for their propaganda aimed at stopping Californians from voting it into law.
I urge you to participate in the Money Bomb Against Monsanto, which was launched on May 1. By May 26, a broad coalition of food-, farming-, health groups, and organic food manufacturers, will attempt to raise one million dollars (i.e. “The Money Bomb”) to help get this law passed.
Donations can be made online, via regular snail mail, and over the phone. And to sweeten the deal further, a group of “Right to Know” public interest organizations and organic companies have pledged to match the first million dollars raised in this nationwide “Drop the Money Bomb on Monsanto Campaign.” So please, help us raise two million dollars to win this historic campaign!
You can donate online, by phone, or by dropping a check in the mail.
Donate Today!
References:
i USA Today April 29, 2012
ii Cornucopia Institute, Cereal Crimes Report, October 11, 2011
iii Cornucopia Institute April 26, 2012
iv USA Today April 29, 2012
v Hartman Group, Beyond Organic and Natural: Resolving Confusion in Marketing Foods and Beverages
vi United States Department of Agriculture,Agricultural Marketing Service, National Organic Program, Organic Labeling and Marketing Information
vii Food Marketing Institute, Natural and Organic Foods, Executive Summary
viii US Food and Drug Administration, August 2000, Action levels for poisonous or deleterious substances in human food and animal feed
ix Environmental Protection Agency, Pesticides: Health and Safety, Pesticides and Food:
What the Pesticide Residue Limits are on Food
x US Department of Agriculture, The National list of allowed and prohibited substances
xi Non-GMO Project
xii Chemical Research in Toxicology 2010; 23(10):1586–1595
xiii Chemical Research in Toxicology 2010; 23(10):1586–1595
xiv Chemical Research in Toxicology 2009 Jan;22(1):97-105.
A note on a Rhode Island grocer’s shelf has gone viral, informing consumers everywhere that the popular “natural” cereal brand Kashi actually contains genetically engineered grains
As a result of consumer outrage, the Kashi brand, which is owned by Kellogg Company, has now pledged to use at least 70 percent certified organic ingredients by 2015—a move that may be too little, too late for many health conscious consumers. The pledge came just days after initially trying to further mislead consumers by denying the test results, which had found Kashi GoLean cereal contained 100 percent genetically engineered soy
Currently, the ONLY label that can protect you against genetically engineered ingredients, synthetic pesticides, and other harmful additives is the USDA 100% Organic label
By Dr. Mercola
A simple sign on a grocery store shelf has gone viral, causing a storm of outrage among consumers who feel they’ve been misled by cereal maker Kellogg’s claims about its Kashi cereals. A Rhode Island grocer posted a note on the shelf where Kashi was supposed to be, saying he’d learned it wasn’t 100 percent natural after all, and therefore wasn’t carrying it anymore.
It turns out the soy in Kashi cereals comes from genetically modified Roundup-ready soybeans, which have a gene inserted in them that allows the crop to withstand otherwise lethal doses of the weed killer.
USA Today reported that consumers felt duped into believing that Kashi was all-natural when it’s noti. Their complaints were initially brushed off by Kashi general Manager David DeSouza, who told USA Today that since the FDA doesn’t regulate the term “natural,” the cereal maker has done nothing wrong by defining “natural” as minimally-processed with no artificial flavors, colors, preservatives or sweeteners.
Were You Duped by Kashi’s Wholesome Brand Identity?
People generally tend to believe that the word “natural” refers to foods grown “in a natural way,” which really amounts to organic farming methods, or close to it; sans harsh chemicals, and most definitely not something that has been genetically engineered. Unfortunately, that’s not what the “natural” label represents at all. In fact, the “natural” label is unregulated, and companies can define it as they please.
But most food manufacturers are well aware of this general misperception of what the label means, and frequently misuse it to lure health conscious consumers into spending more. This is known as “green-washing” and it certainly applies in this case.
Adding insult to injury, the company appears to have made a poor attempt to save face by further misleading consumers about the accuracy of the information that led the Rhode Island grocer to not carry the Kashi brand anymore.
The Cornucopia Institute released a report, Cereal Crimes, back in November of last yearii, which details the presence of genetically engineered grains in a number of leading “natural” cereal brands, including Kellogg’s Kashi brand. Shockingly, many of the products tested were found to contain high amounts of genetically engineered grains—some, including Kashi, containing 100 percent genetically engineered grains! The report also mentions a class action lawsuit filed against Kellogg/Kashi on August 31, 2011, "for allegedly misleading consumers with its "natural" claims. One Kashi® product in particular, GoLean® Shakes, is composed almost entirely of synthetic and unnaturally processed ingredients, according to the plaintiff."
The report contrasts these findings with tests of certified organic cereal products, which by law are not allowed to contain any genetically engineered ingredients or synthetic pesticides. While some were found to be mildly contaminated with genetically engineered ingredients, overall, the report highlights the fact that the ONLY way to ensure you’re not buying a genetically engineered product is to buy a product bearing the USDA 100% Organic label.
When Greenwashing Attempts Finally Backfire...
Once the grocer’s sign went viral and angry consumers began overloading the Kashi telephone lines, the company switched to a recorded message stating they were temporarily unable to accept calls. Then, according to an April 26 report by Cornucopia Instituteiii:
“When the company again began accepting calls, a Kashi consumer affairs employee, Rick Duran, told a Cornucopia staff member that “no actual testing” of their cereal products had been performed. This mimicked the analysis also offered in a response by the company in an online video posted that same afternoon on the Kashi Facebook page. The video spokesperson called Cornucopia’s information “scientifically inaccurate and misleading because it was not based on actual testing of Kashi products.”
“This characterization of our work by Kashi is blatantly false,” said Will Fantle, Cornucopia’s Research Director. “We purchased a readily available box of Kashi’s GoLean® cereal from a Whole Foods store. We then sent a sample to an accredited national lab for testing, finding that the soy in the natural cereal was 100% GMO.”
The Kashi video also suggested, disingenuously, that any genetically engineered contamination in their food was from incidental sources rather than crops intentionally grown from GMO seed. While acknowledging that over 80% of the soybeans grown in North America are GMO, they explain that, “practices in agricultural storage, handling, and shipping, have lead to an environment where GMOs are not sufficiently controlled.”
“This is classic public relations spin and crisis communications work, where corporations use misinformation to try to cover their tracks,” said Rebekah Wilce, of the Center for Media and Democracy/PRWatch, which helps expose corporate PR tactics...”
Three days later, the USA Today reportediv:
“... Kellogg got itself into trouble by "not being entirely transparent," says Roger Nyhus, president of Nyhus Communications in Seattle. He sees a trend among some companies "of fudging language to allay consumer concerns and jump on the green bandwagon, and I think it's starting to backfire." ... Kashi's DeSouza says that by 2015, all new Kashi products will "contain at least 70 percent USDA organic certified ingredients."
So, in a matter of days, Kashi ended up backpedaling as their initial attempt to discredit the Cornucopia Institute’s test results backfired, and now the company has agreed to ensure their products will, within the next three years, contain at least 70 percent certified organic ingredients. While this is probably not going to be enough for most health conscious consumers, Kashi’s pledge is at least a good demonstration of the power of consumer education, and that consumers ultimately have the power to influence even the largest of food companies. After all, they can only sell what you’re willing to buy!
“Natural” Label is Frequently Misused to Lure Health Conscious Consumers
The misuse of the term "natural" by companies who simply pay lip service to sustainability and the organic movement undermines companies that are truly sincere in their efforts to bring you eco-friendly, unadulterated, safe foods.
And companies like Kashi cannot rightfully claim ignorance about the impact the word “natural” has—marketing firm polls have shown that more people respond favorably to the “all-natural” label than the organic label! It’s a powerful word that conjures up wholesomeness in most people’s minds. Marketing terms such as “natural” are certainly not chosen willy-nilly. No, they’re selected based on what works and what sells. As illustrated by this market research summary by The Hartman Groupv:
“Consumer understanding and shopping behavior of organic and natural foods and beverages continues to change and evolve. Today’s consumers are confused, yet continue to be engaged by the vast array of products, messages, symbols and labels they encounter when making decisions about what to eat or drink and where they shop.
... This study will identify the hierarchy among these attributes and point out differences by product category as well as deeper distinctions between “organic” and “natural” themselves. It will enable companies to go beyond the clutter of product call-outs to have a singular focus on what matters most to consumers thereby increasing brand loyalty and likelihood of purchase”
According to a 2010 Hartman Group poll, more than 60 percent of consumers erroneously believe that the "natural" label implies or suggests the absence of genetically engineered ingredients, so Kashi’s statement that there’s nothing wrong with using genetically engineered ingredients in their “natural” products is rather weak. Food companies know this misconception exists, and they actively prey on consumers’ assumptions. Fortunately, the Cornucopia Institute’s report has awakened many to this sad truth. As one now-former Kashi consumer stated on the company’s Facebook page:
“Yours is the only brand cereal I have bought for years. Not anymore! You are despicable. Everything you supposedly stand for is a lie.”
The Difference Between Natural and Organic
It’s important to understand that the “natural” label is not regulated and does not provide a guarantee of being free of genetically engineered ingredients or synthetic pesticides and additives. Currently, the ONLY label that can protect you against genetically engineered ingredients and other unsavory additives is the USDA 100% Organic label.
The USDA's National Organic Program (NOP) took effect October 21, 2002, and regulates the standards for any farm, wild crop harvesting, or handling operation that wants to sell an agricultural product as organically produced. The labeling requirements of the NOP apply to raw, fresh products and processed products that contain organic agricultural ingredientsvi. In order to qualify as organic, a product must be grown and processed using organic farming methods that recycle resources and promote biodiversity.
Crops must be grown without synthetic pesticides, bioengineered genes, petroleum-based fertilizers, or sewage sludge-based fertilizersvii. Organic livestock must have access to the outdoors and cannot be given antibiotics or growth hormones.
Products labeled "USDA 100% organic" must contain only organically produced materials
Products labeled simply "USDA organic" must contain at least 95 percent organic ingredients, whereas
The label "made with organic ingredients" can contain anywhere between 70 to 95 percent organic ingredients
Organic products cannot be irradiated, are not allowed to contain preservatives or flavor enhancing chemicals, nor can they contain traces of heavy metals or other contaminants in excess of tolerances set by the FDAviii. Additionally, the pesticide residue level cannot be higher than 5 percent of the maximum EPA pesticide toleranceix. For the complete National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances under the USDA organic label, see this linkx. To learn more about organic foods and the findings detailed in the Cereal Crimes report, please listen to my interview with Mark Kastel of the Cornucopia Institute.
Download Interview Transcript
The Non-GMO Project Verified Seal
There’s yet another label you need to be aware of, and that is the Non-GMO project’s seal . The Non-GMO Project is a non-profit organization “committed to preserving and building sources of non-GMO products, educating consumers, and providing verified non-GMO choices.”
It’s very important to understand that brands are registered with the Project without being independently lab tested. All they have to do is affirm that their intention is to provide foods that are free of genetically engineered ingredients.
Unfortunately, as the Cereal Crimes report showed, even some products enrolled in the Non-GMO Project, were found to contain genetically engineered ingredients. Barbara's Bakery's Puffins and Whole Foods' 365® Corn Flakes both contained more than 50 percent genetically engineered corn. Meanwhile, the control, Nature's Path® USDA certified organic corn flakes, contained only trace amounts of contamination (less than 0.5 percent genetically engineered corn).
Mom Stands Up to Monsanto and Wins Major Environmental Award
Genetically engineered foods do not just pose a health hazard for those consuming them. GE crops also threaten the health of the environment and those living in GE farming communities, due to the heavy use of pesticides required to grow these crops.
A woman in Argentina who was instrumental in getting the president of Argentina to investigate the connection between pesticide use and the incidence of cancer and other devastating illnesses and deaths in her town has been awarded the 2012 Goldman Environmental Prize—the world’s largest prize honoring grassroots environmentalists. The Goldman recognizes unsung heroes who often take great personal risks to work to protect the world’s natural resources and human lives.
Thirteen years ago Sofia Gatica gave birth to a daughter who died three days later of kidney failure. Determined to learn what killed her child, she learned that the people in her working-class neighborhood, surrounded by genetically engineered soy fields and subjected to regular insecticide spraying, were plagued with unexplained health issues including high rates of neurological and respiratory diseases, birth defects, and infant mortality. Even though she faced an uphill battle and death threats, Gatica succeeded in getting a municipal ordinance passed prohibiting aerial spraying around her town. Argentina’s Supreme Court followed with a ruling that not only banned chemical spraying near populated areas, but ordered the government and soy producers to prove the chemicals are safe.
The Devastating Health Effects of Roundup
As of July 2013, Argentina will no longer allow the use of endulsofan, an off-patent organochlorine insecticide, and Gatica is currently involved with an effort to enact a nationwide ban on glyphosate as well. Glyphosate is the active ingredient in Monsanto’s broad-spectrum herbicide Roundup, which is used on all genetically engineered Roundup-Ready crops, which have been genetically altered to withstand otherwise lethal doses of the chemical.
Glyphosate is easily one of the world's most overlooked poisons. Research published in 2010 showed that the chemical, which works by inhibiting an enzyme called EPSP synthase that is necessary for plants to grow, causes birth defects in frogs and chicken embryos at far lower levels than used in agricultural and garden applications . The malformations primarily affected the:
Skull
Face
Midline and developing brain
Spinal cord
The amount of glyphosate residue you can be exposed to through food is remarkably high, in terms of being close to the maximum residue limit (MRL) allowed. According to a report in the journal Chemical Research in Toxicology, the highest MRL for glyphosate in food and feed products in the EU is 20 mg/kg. Genetically engineered soybeans have been found to contain residue levels as high as 17 mg/kg, and malformations in frog and chicken embryos occurred at 2.03 mg/kg! That's 10 times lower than the MRL. Other independent scientific research has also found that glyphosate has the potential to cause grave health damage, including a 2009 study that tested formulations of Roundup that were highly diluted (up to 100,000 times or more) on human cells, and even then the cells died within 24 hours.
Why We MUST Insist on Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods
Labeling may be the only way to stop the proliferation of genetically engineered foods in the US, but simple petitions will likely fail. We strongly support state initiatives, such as California's ballot initiative to require labeling for genetically engineered foods sold in their state. A coalition of consumer, public health and environmental organizations, food companies, and individuals has already submitted the California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act to the State Attorney General, and thousands of volunteers have done an outstanding job collecting the required signatures.
Now, the campaign needs funding. Needless to say, it's going to be an enormous battle, as the biotech industry will outspend us by 100 to 1, if not more, for their propaganda aimed at stopping Californians from voting it into law.
I urge you to participate in the Money Bomb Against Monsanto, which was launched on May 1. By May 26, a broad coalition of food-, farming-, health groups, and organic food manufacturers, will attempt to raise one million dollars (i.e. “The Money Bomb”) to help get this law passed.
Donations can be made online, via regular snail mail, and over the phone. And to sweeten the deal further, a group of “Right to Know” public interest organizations and organic companies have pledged to match the first million dollars raised in this nationwide “Drop the Money Bomb on Monsanto Campaign.” So please, help us raise two million dollars to win this historic campaign!
You can donate online, by phone, or by dropping a check in the mail.
Donate Today!
References:
i USA Today April 29, 2012
ii Cornucopia Institute, Cereal Crimes Report, October 11, 2011
iii Cornucopia Institute April 26, 2012
iv USA Today April 29, 2012
v Hartman Group, Beyond Organic and Natural: Resolving Confusion in Marketing Foods and Beverages
vi United States Department of Agriculture,Agricultural Marketing Service, National Organic Program, Organic Labeling and Marketing Information
vii Food Marketing Institute, Natural and Organic Foods, Executive Summary
viii US Food and Drug Administration, August 2000, Action levels for poisonous or deleterious substances in human food and animal feed
ix Environmental Protection Agency, Pesticides: Health and Safety, Pesticides and Food:
What the Pesticide Residue Limits are on Food
x US Department of Agriculture, The National list of allowed and prohibited substances
xi Non-GMO Project
xii Chemical Research in Toxicology 2010; 23(10):1586–1595
xiii Chemical Research in Toxicology 2010; 23(10):1586–1595
xiv Chemical Research in Toxicology 2009 Jan;22(1):97-105.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
