12 Medical Myths Even Most Doctors Believe…

Here are 12 myths regarding health, diet, exercise, and supplements that you probably don’t know, but should.

1: Cardio is One of the Best Types of Exercise

In recent years, researchers have begun to realize that conventional cardio, such as jogging, is not all it’s been cracked up to be, and that you can actually improve your health and increase fat burning by making slight modifications to your cardio routine.

The problem is that traditional cardio only works on the slow twitch muscle fibers in your red muscle, completely ignoring your white muscle super-fast twitch fibers.

“Peak 8” refers to peak exercises done once or twice a week, in which you raise your heart rate up to your anaerobic threshold for 20 to 30 seconds, followed by a 90-second recovery period.

To perform these properly you will want to get very close to, if not exceed, your maximum heart rate by the last interval. Your maximum heart rate is calculated as 220 minus your age. You will need a heart rate monitor to measure this as it is nearly impossible to accurately measure your heart rate manually when it is above 150.

Researchers have found that interval cardio produces a unique metabolic response that is in large part responsible for its superior benefits. Intermittent sprinting produces high levels of chemical compounds called catecholamines, which allow more fat to be burned from under your skin and within your muscles. The resulting increase in fat oxidation is thought to drive the increased weight loss.

It is also the only type of exercise that will increase growth hormone levels. This becomes especially important after the age of 30, when growth hormones steadily decline. It is much safer and far less expensive to have your body make growth hormone naturally thoughPeak 8 type exercises than inject it like many athletes do to the tune of $1500 per month.

2: Vaccines are Safe and Effective and Prevent Disease

I completely understand that for many this issue is not debatable as they believe that vaccines are one of the greatest gifts to public health in the history of civilization.

If you believe that, then let me encourage you to open your mind and explore other views held by many well respected physicians, scientists, clinicians and pro-vaccine safety educators.

You might want to review the article Read This Before Vaccinating for Anything, to help you start your exploration process.

When it comes to vaccines, there are three primary questions that need to be considered.

• First, is the vaccine in question safe?
• Secondly, does it effectively prevent disease?
• And third, which vaccines can safely and effectively be given together or in close succession?

Unfortunately, these issues have not been sufficiently studied for most vaccines, and those vaccines that have been studied frequently show that they are either unsafe or ineffective, or both!

Pro-vaccine-safety educators have long been saying that vaccines can over-stimulate your child’s immune system, sometimes causing the very disease it’s designed to protect against, or worse. And, when several vaccines are administered together, or in close succession, their interaction may completely overwhelm your child’s developing immune system.

This is one of the primary problems with vaccines in general – their detrimental impact on your body’s primary, natural defense against ALL disease.

Now consider that if your child is vaccinated according to the CDC’s recommended schedule, by the time your child starts kindergarten he or she will have received 48 doses of 14 vaccines. Of these, 36 doses will be given during the first 18 months of life – a time when your child’s body and brain is undergoing massive development!

Public health officials have NEVER proven that it is indeed safe to inject this volume of vaccines into infants. What’s more, they cannot explain why, concurrent with an increasing number of vaccinations, there has been an explosion of neurological and immune system disorders in American children.

This issue covers so much ground, it’s impossible to even try to summarize the many hazards and the lack of efficiency data for all the vaccines currently being given, in this article.

For more information please visit our vaccine section at http://vaccines.mercola.com/

3: Fluoride in Your Water Lowers Your Risk of Cavities

The theory behind the introduction of fluoride in your water supply initially seems beneficial – to reduce the incidence of dental caries in children. However, the health dangers of fluoride are so numerous; they far outweigh any benefit to your teeth, and that’s IF water fluoridation actually did what its claimed to do.

Today, even promoters of fluoridation concede that the major benefits are only from topical applications; fluoride works from the outside of the tooth, not from inside of your body, so why swallow it?

Statistics tell us that water fluoridation is ineffective for preventing caries. There is practically no difference in tooth decay between fluoridated and non-fluoridated countries, and no difference between states that have a high- or low percentage of their water fluoridated.

Meanwhile, fluoride can cause significant harm, from dental fluorosis to thyroid damage to reduced IQ… and much more.

I’ve joined forces with the Fluoride Action Network (FAN) to help end water fluoridation poisoning in Canada and the United States.

For more about the dangers of fluoride, and information about how to get involved in this campaign, please see this recent article, which also includes an excellent interview with Dr. Paul Connett, who created FAN and is one of the foremost experts on this topic.

4: GMOs Crops are Safe, Well Tested and Economically Beneficial

GMOs may be the greatest health disaster in the American diet. Within 9 years of their introduction in 1996, multiple chronic illnesses jumped from 7 percent to 13 percent of the population, food allergies doubled in less time, and many other ailments have exponentially increased with the introduction of GM foods.

Millions may already be suffering health problems caused by genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in their diet. The American Academy of Environmental Medicine has already urged doctors to prescribe non-GMO diets for all patients, citing studies that show how GMOs cause disorders such as vital organ damage, gastrointestinal and immune system problems, accelerated aging, infertility, and dysfunctional regulation of insulin and cholesterol.

But not only are GM foods a health disaster, they also pose a significant environmental threat, and industry promises of financial benefits have turned out to be false as well.

For a quick introduction, I recommend reading the article 10 Reasons to Avoid Genetically Modified Foods, which delves into everything from the health problems associated with eating GM foods to the evidence against GM crops as a sustainable, economically and environmentally viable alternative to traditional farming.

5: Sun Causes Skin Cancer

There are many misconceptions about melanoma – the most dangerous type of skin cancer that accounts for more than 75 percent of skin cancer deaths. But despite all the bad press linking sun exposure to skin cancer, there’s almost no evidence at all to support that stance. There is, however, plenty of evidence to the contrary.

Over the years, several studies have already confirmed that appropriate sun exposure actually helps prevent skin cancer. In fact, melanoma occurrence has been found to decrease with greater sun exposure, and can be increased by sunscreens.

In my interview with vitamin D expert Dr. Robert Heaney, he explains how the conventional recommendations are in fact causing the very health problem they claim to prevent.

How does sunlight prevent, rather than cause, skin cancer?

In short, it’s the vitamin D formed in your skin from exposure to sunlight that provides this built in cancer protection.

The vitamin D goes directly to genes in your skin that help prevent the types of abnormalities that ultraviolet light causes. Unfortunately, if you follow the conventional recommendation to avoid sun exposure or always use sunscreen, your skin will not make any vitamin D, leaving you without this built-in cancer protection.

Statistics confirm the truth of these findings, as melanoma rates have increased right along with sun avoidance and increased use of sunscreens. If avoiding the sun actually was the answer, then melanoma rates should have decreased exponentially over the past couple of decades…

Instead, sun avoidance and the excessive use of sun screen are actually the two primary reasons for the rise in melanoma.

6: Saturated Fat Causes Heart Disease

As recently as 2002, the “expert” Food & Nutrition Board issued the following misguided statement, which epitomizes this myth:

“Saturated fats and dietary cholesterol have no known beneficial role in preventing chronic disease and are not required at any level in the diet.”

This dangerous recommendation, which arose from an unproven hypothesis from the mid-1950s, has been harming your health and that of your loved ones for about 40 years now.

The truth is, saturated fats from animal and vegetable sources provide the building blocks for cell membranes and a variety of hormones and hormone-like substances, without which your body cannot function optimally.

They also act as carriers for important fat-soluble vitamins A, D, E and K. Dietary fats are also needed for the conversion of carotene to vitamin A, for mineral absorption, and for a host of other biological processes.

In fact, saturated is the preferred fuel for your heart!

For more information about saturated fats and the essential role they play in maintaining your health, please read my previous articleThe Truth About Saturated Fat.

7: Artificial Sweeteners are Safe, Well Tested and Help Promote Weight Loss

Most people use artificial sweeteners to lose weight. The amazing irony is that nearly all the studies that have carefully analyzed their effectiveness show that those who use artificial sweeteners actually gain more weight than those who consume caloric sweeteners.

In 2005, data gathered from the 25-year long San Antonio Heart Study showed that drinking diet soft drinks increased the likelihood of serious weight gain – far more so than regular soda. On average, each diet soft drink the participants consumed per day increased their risk of becoming overweight by 65 percent within the next seven to eight years, and made them 41 percent more likely to become obese.

The reasons for this ironic reality are still being investigated, but there are several potential causes, including:

• Sweet taste alone appears to increase hunger, regardless of caloric content.
• Artificial sweeteners appear to simply perpetuate a craving for sweets, and overall sugar consumption is therefore not reduced—leading to further problems controlling your weight.
• Artificial sweeteners may disrupt your body’s natural ability to “count calories,” as evidenced in studies such as this 2004 study at Purdue University, which found that rats fed artificially sweetened liquids ate more high-calorie food than rats fed high-caloric sweetened liquids.

In the end, the research tells us that artificial sweeteners are NOT a dieter’s best friend, because contrary to what the marketing campaigns claim, low- or no-calorie artificial sweeteners are more likely to help you pack on the pounds than shed them.

There are also a large number of health dangers associated with artificial sweeteners and aspartame in particular. I’ve started compiling a growing list of studies pertaining to health problems associated with aspartame, which you can find here. If you’re still on the fence, I highly recommend reviewing these studies for yourself so that you can make an educated decision.

For more information on aspartame, the worst artificial sweetener, please see my aspartame video.

8: Soy is a Health Food

The meteoric rise of soy as a “health food” is a perfect example of how a brilliant marketing strategy can fool millions. But make no mistake about it, unfermented soy products are NOT healthful additions to your diet.

If you find this recommendation startling then I would encourage you to review my Why Soy Can Damage Your Health, which contains links to dozens of articles on the topic, and a video I recently did.

On the contrary, thousands of studies have linked unfermented soy to malnutrition, digestive distress, immune-system breakdown, thyroid dysfunction, cognitive decline, reproductive disorders and infertility—even cancer and heart disease.

Not only that, but more than 90 percent of American soy crops are genetically modified, which carries its own set of health risks.

Here is a sampling of the detrimental health effects that have been linked to soy consumption:

• Breast cancer
• Brain damage
• Infant abnormalities
• Thyroid disorders
• Kidney stones
• Immune system impairment
• Severe, potentially fatal food allergies
• Impaired fertility
• Danger during pregnancy and nursing

I am not opposed to all soy, however. Organic and, most importantly, properly fermented soy does have great health benefits. Examples of such healthful fermented soy products include tempeh, miso and natto.

9: Whole Grains are Good for Everyone

The use of whole-grains is an easy subject to get confused on especially for those who have a passion for nutrition, as for the longest time we were told the fiber in whole grains is highly beneficial.

Unfortunately ALL grains, including whole-grain and organic varieties, can elevate your insulin levels, which can increase your risk of disease.

It has been my experience that more than 85 percent of Americans have trouble controlling their insulin levels — especially those who have the following conditions:

• Overweight
• Diabetes
• High blood pressure
• High cholesterol
• Protein metabolic types

In addition, sub-clinical gluten intolerance is far more common than you might think, which can also wreak havoc with your health.

As a general rule, I strongly recommend eliminating grains as well as sugars from your diet, especially if you have any of the above conditions that are related to insulin resistance. The higher your insulin levels and the more prominent your signs of insulin overload are, the more ambitious your grain elimination needs to be.

If you are one of the fortunate ones without insulin resistance and of normal body weight, then grains are fine, especially whole grains. It is wise to continue to monitor your grain consumption and your health as life is dynamic and constantly changing. What might be fine when you are 25 or 30 could become a major problem at 40 when your growth hormone and level of exercise is different.

10: All Plant Based Supplements are as Good as Animal Supplements

The primary example here is that of omega-3’s. It’s very important to realize that not all omega-3 fats are the same, and that the type and source of your omega-3 will make a big difference in the health benefits it provides.

There are three types of omega-3 fats:

• DHA (Docosahexaenoic Acid)
• EPA (Eicosapentaenoic Acid)
• ALA (Alpha-Linolenic Acid)

Many people do not realize that most of the well-known health benefits associated with omega-3 fats – such as mental health, stronger bones and heart health — are linked to the animal-based omega-3 fats (EPA and DHA), not the plant-based omega-3 fat (ALA).

ALA, which is the type of omega-3 found in flaxseed and nuts, is converted into EPA and DHA in your body, but only at a very low ratio.

So even if you eat large amounts of ALA, your body can only convert a relatively small amount into EPA and DHA, and only when sufficient enzymes are present.

This does not mean plant-based omega-3 fats are intrinsically harmful or that they should be avoided, only that you ideally want to include an animal-based form as well. Personally, I regularly include omega-3 (ALA) plant-based foods, like flax and hemp, in my diet, but these are always combined with animal-based omega-3 fats.

But in order to reap its most important health benefits, your omega-3 needs to be from an animal source. For more information on this topic, please read through my previous article, Are You Getting the Right Type of Omega-3 Fats?

11: Milk Does Your Body Good

Can milk do your body good?

Yes, if it’s RAW.

Unfortunately, this myth insists that conventional pasteurized milk has health benefits, which is far from true. Conventional health agencies also refuse to address the real dangers of the growth hormones and antibiotics found in conventional milk.

Please understand that I do not recommend drinking pasteurized milk of any kind, including organic, because once milk has been pasteurized its physical structure is changed in a way that can actually cause allergies and immune problems.

Important enzymes like lactase are destroyed, which causes many people to not be able to digest milk. Additionally, vitamins (such as A, C, B6 and B12) are diminished and fragile milk proteins are radically transformed from health nurturing to unnatural amino acid configurations that can actually worsen your health.

The eradication of beneficial bacteria through the pasteurization process also ends up promoting pathogens rather than protecting you from them.

The healthy alternative to pasteurized milk is raw milk, which is an outstanding source of nutrients including beneficial bacteria such as lactobacillus acidophilus, vitamins and enzymes, and it is, in my estimation, one of the finest sources of calcium available.

For more details please watch the interview I did with Mark McAfee, who is the owner of Organic Pastures, the largest organic dairy in the US.

Original Post: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/09/20/the-real-truth-about-the-top-10-health-myths.aspx

12: Low-Fat Diets are Healthy

The low-fat myth may have done more harm to the health of millions than any other dietary recommendation. Again, just as the recommendations to avoid sunshine has increased melanoma rates, the low-fat craze led to increased consumption of trans-fats, which we now know increases your risk of obesity, diabetes and heart disease.

To end the confusion, it’s very important to realize that eating fat will not make you fat!

The primary cause of excess weight and all the chronic diseases associated with it, is actually the consumption of too much sugar — especially fructose, but also all sorts of grains, which rapidly convert to sugar in your body.

If only the low-fat craze had been a low-sugar craze… then we wouldn’t have nearly as much chronic disease as we have today.

6 “Healthy” Foods to Avoid

1. Flavored Yogurt

Brace yourself for culture shock. Plain yogurt naturally contains about 16 grams of sugar per cup. But if you eat flavored yogurt, you could be downing 15 or more additional grams of sugar, which is like shoveling in four extra teaspoonfuls.

What to eat instead: Choose plain, low-fat yogurt and stir in a teaspoon of honey, maple syrup, or all-fruit spread for a hint of sweetness. Or opt for fat-free Greek yogurt, which is lower in sugar than even regular plain yogurt but often has double the protein to keep you satisfied longer.

2. Sugar-Free Cookies and Candy

Don’t fall for the no-sugar scam: When manufacturers remove the sweet stuff, they often add fat. One popular brand offers chocolate-chip cookies that each contain 160 calories and 9 grams of fat, so why not eat the real thing? You might save calories with sugar-free candy, but many contain sorbitol, which can cause bloating and diarrhea.

What to eat instead: Get your cookie fix with graham crackers, which have almost a teaspoon less sugar per serving than many other packaged cookies. Or find a 100-calorie snack pack of your favorite (try Keebler Fudge Shoppe Mini Fudge Stripes). Taking a trip to candy land? Grab a 60-calorie Tootsie Pop or a York Peppermint Pattie (140 calories and 2.5 grams of fat).

3. Trail Mix

Store-bought versions of this hiking staple should take a hike. A 1-ounce handful of banana chips packs 10 grams of fat (they’re usually deep-fried), and yogurt-covered raisins are coated with partially hydrogenated palm kernel oil, which contains saturated and trans fats.

What to eat instead: Toss your own trail mix with nuts, dried fruit (raisins or chopped apricots), whole-grain cereal, mini pretzels, and a few chocolate chips. Limit your portion to one cup.

4. Veggie Chips

The rainbow-hued chips are no better than their potato counterparts. While both may boast a little vitamin A or C, your hips won’t know the difference: The salty snacks have about 150 calories and 9 or 10 grams of fat per handful. And that bag may contain plain old chips in disguise; sometimes manufacturers simply add food coloring to potato flour.

What to eat instead: Be sure your chips list a vegetable, not potato flour or corn flour, as the first ingredient (we like Terra Chips) and stick with just one portion. Or skip them in favor of baked tortilla chips: Pair a serving (about 12 chips) with 1/2 cup of salsa; you’ll quell your crunch craving and get a full serving of veggies with only 153 nearly fat-free calories.

5. Granola

Pancakes drowned in syrup, eggs swimming in hollandaise sauce — is there a healthy option on the brunch menu? Granola seems harmless, but it’s no breakfast of champions. One cup contains up to 560 calories and 28 grams of fat before you add milk.

What to eat instead: Reluctant to give up that sweet, nutty taste? Skip granola at restaurants, where you can’t control your portion. Enjoy it at home by mixing a quarter cup into a cup of low-cal, whole-grain cereal, such as All-Bran Complete Wheat Flakes, or sprinkle a tablespoon on oatmeal.

6. Ground Turkey

It seems like a no-brainer for burgers and lasagna, but ground turkey often includes fat and skin. A 3-ounce serving can contain 13 grams of fat — almost triple the amount in lean ground beef. With 40-plus percent of your day’s worth of cholesterol, regular ground chicken is no better.

What to eat instead: Look closely at labels. Extra-lean turkey is your best bet, with 1 gram of fat and no saturated fat per serving. Can’t find it? Buy at least 92 percent lean ground beef.

Original Post: http://shine.yahoo.com/channel/health/6-quot-healthy-quot-foods-that-are-fat-traps-in-disguise-1976317/

5 key skills to preserving a healthy relationship

I was reading this article on Yahoo! and I thought it was a good article to focus on a different side of “health.” It seems we, including myself as a physician, seem to focus on physical health, diet, exercise, etc. But we sometimes forget to focus on emotional health. Emotional health starts when you first wake up next to that significant other and ends when you go to bed at night and everything in between. Anything we can do to keep that aspect of our life “healthy” will only help and amplify all of the other physical wellness aspects of our life that we work so hard on. A happy relationship can make all the difference in being a completely “healthy” person.

The article is written from the standpoint of a husband, but I feel is great advice in ANY relationship.

5 key skills to preserving a healthy relationship

by Seth Warton

Originally posted at: http://yahoo.match.com/cp.aspx?cpp=/cppp/yahoo/article.html&articleid=11089&TrackingID=526103&BannerID=682740&ER=sessiontimeout

Be willing to forfeit: the win-win strategy
Disagreements are inevitable — as unavoidable as Tuesdays or the common cold. They don’t have to be acrimonious, though. And I’ve learned that in marriage the choice is often to win or to be happy. Being harsh and critical in an argument is only going to hurt feelings and alienate your partner. That’s fine if you want to rule the roost, but if you want to love and be loved, you’ve got to care for your partner’s feelings, especially when you’re fighting. “When there’s a lot of goodwill, it’s amazing what you can say and still feel good about each other,” says Catherine Hastings, Ph.D., a licensed marriage and family therapist in Lancaster, PA.  Hastings sees couples become polarized in their disagreements, with neither person willing to yield. The problem, she says, “is the idea that there has to be right and wrong in an argument. And there really doesn’t.”

Get to the point, nicely
I can be a little sensitive sometimes, and not in the sweet and caring way. Usually in the don’t-talk-to-me-about-my-shortcomings way. Lots of couples struggle to discuss the big issues that can rend a marriage in two. Who wants to talk about money management, family relationships and child rearing (to name just a few) while you’re falling in love? These don’t come up easily when you’re sipping coffee and eating molten chocolate cake.  “People are not direct enough,” says Jane Barton, Ph.D., a clinical psychologist in Knoxville, TN. “Indirect communication can be really damaging.”  She says that couples need to find ways to discuss the touchy subjects before they get married instead of hoping that marriage will fix any conflicts. It won’t. You may find yourself legally and emotionally bound to someone with a wicked online gambling habit or who thinks children respond best to pain.
Take money habits, for instance. “With the economy the way it is and things in the news, it would be an easy thing to bring up on a date,” she says. You can also learn a lot by watching your partner. “Is she shopping at Barney’s and really shouldn’t be?”
The point is not to criticize your partner and attempt to rein in his or her habits. You want to know if his or her decisions are in line with your values. If you’re honest with yourself about your needs, you’ll know if conflicts are on the horizon. “Don’t take on the task of teaching a person or being anyone’s personal therapist,” says Barton. “Identify what you feel and share it.”

Recognize that there is an “I” in marriage
My wife and I are a team, talking, sharing and negotiating most decisions together. We’re individuals, too, though, and we don’t lose sight of that. We encourage each other’s goals and ambitions because we don’t feel threatened by them.
“Healthy relationships have room for that — his interests, her interests,” says Hastings. After all, she points out, “if you’re not able to address your own needs, no one else is going to do it for you.”

Be a copycat
Finding that mix of individuality and teamwork isn’t necessarily easy, but it’s essential. We simultaneously let each other be who we are while being influenced by each other. I had to learn to argue kindly, for instance, giving up the notion of the win. My wife somehow already knew that when we met.
John Gottman, Ph.D., is a clinical psychologist who has studied relationships for more than 30 years, written several leading books about marriage and is the executive director of the Relationship Research Institute in Seattle, WA. According to Gottman, one of the key components of a successful marriage is that the husband allows the wife to influence him. While women in general tend to be influenced by men without much emotional difficulty, men are often resistant. A man who allows a woman’s ideas and attitudes to impact his own is creating an equal exchange within the marriage.
And, as Hastings points out, you should learn to appreciate the difference. Each of you has strengths and weaknesses. Learning to let the strengths come through, no matter whose they are, makes for a better team.

Be positive — it’s not just a blood type
One of my wife’s greatest strengths is a generally positive outlook. Allowing her to shape the spin on a situation isn’t always easy, with my undeniable knowledge that the world is ending. But slowly, over the course of our marriage, I’ve become willing to see through her eyes.
“People need to learn early on,” says Barton, “that there are always going to be problems. There’s always going to be stress, somebody gets sick or somebody dies, and that’s part of life.” Successful couples, she says, dwell on the good times and not on the bad.

Nine Reasons to Drink Green Tea Daily

Have you been wondering “what’s all the fuss about green tea?” Now you can stop wondering and start drinking … green tea, that is. This flavorful beverage offers many health benefits to anyone who drinks it regularly. Green tea contains a potent plant nutrient known as epigallocatechin gallate, or EGCG, for short. But don’t fret, you don’t have to keep track of its chemical name to reap the health benefits.

Here are nine reasons to start drinking green tea or continue drinking it if you’re already hooked.

1. Green tea is a superb fat fighter. Its active ingredient, EGCG, increases the rate at which fat is burned in your body.

2. It targets belly fat. Research at Tufts University indicates that EGCG in green tea, like other catechins, activate fat-burning genes in the abdomen to speed weight loss by 77 percent.

3. Green tea keeps energy stable by balancing blood sugar levels. EGCG improves insulin use in the body to prevent blood sugar spikes and crashes that can result in fatigue, irritability, and cravings for unhealthy foods.

4. Research shows it may be helpful against lung cancer. In an April 2010 study published in Cancer Prevention Research, EGCG was found to suppress lung cancer cell growth.

5. Green tea may halt colorectal cancer. In numerous other studies, EGCG appears to inhibit colorectal cancers.

6. In research, it appears to cause prostate cancer cells to commit suicide. A March 2010 study inCancer Science indicated that EGCG aids the body by causing prostate cancer cells to commit suicide.

7. Green tea may prevent skin damage and wrinkling. EGCG appears to be 200 times more powerful than vitamin E at destroying skin-damaging free radicals. Free radicals react with healthy cells in the body, causing damage, so lessening their numbers may help reduce wrinkling and other signs of aging.

8. It contains a potent antioxidant that kills free radicals. Because it is a potent antioxidant green tea can positively impact a lot more than skin cells. Free radicals are increasingly linked to many serious chronic illnesses like arthritis, diabetes, and cancer.

9. Green tea tastes good. If you’re not wild about the flavor, try a few different kinds. Try it iced or hot. Add some of the natural herb stevia to sweeten it if you want a sweeter drink. I wasn’t crazy about green tea the first few times I tried it, but now I love it with a fresh squeeze of lemon and a few drops of stevia over ice — et voila! Green tea lemonade. Mmmmm.

Reap the rewards
Add one or two teaspoons of green tea leaves to a cup of boiling water, preferably in a tea strainer. Let steep for five minutes. Pour over ice if you prefer a cold beverage. Most experts recommend three cups daily. And, don’t worry, green tea contains a lot less caffeine than coffee or black tea.

Copyright Michelle Schoffro Cook. Adapted with permission from The Life Force Diet. Michelle Schoffro Cook, RNCP, ROHP, DAc, DNM, is a best-selling and six-time book author and doctor of natural medicine.

WHY MEDICAL DOCTORS HATE CHIROPRACTORS AND PATIENTS LOVE THEM!

WHY DOCTORS HATE CHIROPRACTORS

by: Robert A. Hayden, DC, PhD

If you’ve ever complained of a terrifically sore neck or lingering back pain, I’ll bet someone suggested that you see a chiropractor. I visit my chiropractor when my recurrent neck pain flares up (as in, when I spend too many hours in front of my computer for too many days in a row), and I know lots of other people who see chiropractors, too. Now research is affirming the efficacy of chiropractic care for a number of conditions, and this trend may be further stoked by changes brought about by health-care reform.

For many complaints, including such varied and seemingly unrelated ones as headaches and digestive distress as well as back and neck problems, chiropractic care can often provide safe, effective and fast-working treatment — and (unusual for natural therapies) most insurance plans cover it. However, many mainstream medical doctors aren’t fans. Their reasons aren’t always clear but seem to lie somewhere on the spectrum between being worried that chiropractic care is not safe and feeling threatened that good chiropractors may take away many of their patients.

THE TIME IS RIGHT

In a glass-is-half-full kind of way, today’s troubled health-care environment actually presents an opportunity for chiropractors to gain some long overdue respect — at least that’s a hope that’s currently afloat in the chiropractic community, I heard from Robert A. Hayden, DC, PhD, spokesperson for the American Chiropractic Association. A critical-care nurse for 20 years before becoming a chiropractor himself, Dr. Hayden explained that the nation’s ongoing and pressing concern about health-care costs and treatment efficacy is a good backdrop against which to understand the many ways chiropractic care can help patients.

Why are doctors skeptical? Dr. Hayden told me that one of his regular patients is an orthopedic surgeon — but another orthopedist in his community won’t accept patient referrals from Dr. Hayden, and a nearby hospital won’t perform MRI scans for his patients. He believes this lack of acceptance is fueled by the very fact that chiropractic does not involve drugs and can be an effective alternative to hospitalization and surgery, which makes it attractive to both patients and the bean counters of health-care costs. The fact that Medicare now covers some chiropractic services enhances its credibility but also adds weight to worries that this natural, less invasive and less expensive alternative will divert health-care dollars away from medical doctors and hospitals.

WHAT WILL IT TAKE?

Key to the growing acceptance of chiropractic care is evidence-based research demonstrating that it is safe, clinically effective and cost-efficient. In the latest such effort, funded by Mercer Health and Benefits in San Francisco, Dr. Niteesh Choudry and colleagues reviewed existing literature on the efficacy of chiropractic. Their conclusion is that it works as well as or better than conventional modalities, including exercise programs, drug regimens and surgical intervention, for treating many forms of low back and neck pain, two of the most common medical complaints. Numerous other studies also support the effectiveness of chiropractic treatment for spine and neck issues in particular. For instance, a 2002 study of patients with nonspecific neck pain found that pain was reduced and function improved for 68.3% after seven weeks of chiropractic care, while the success rate for those in the care of general practitioners was only 36%. The patients of chiropractors missed work less frequently and needed less pain medication.

CAN IT CAUSE STROKE?

One very specific concern voiced by many medical doctors is that chiropractic neck manipulation has the potential to cause stroke, or — if done improperly — even death. The basis for this is a fairly rare and often undiagnosed condition in which the vertebral arteries in the neck are weakened, possibly by high levels of homocysteine. The fear is that in a vulnerable patient, twisting or stretching those arteries during a chiropractic manipulation could cause them to rupture.

To investigate whether this is a real danger, researchers at the University of Calgary (Alberta, Canada) studied vertebral arteries from several recently deceased people and found that it would take nine times the force of a typical chiropractic adjustment to damage these arteries and mobilize plaque. In fact, according to Dr. Hayden, normal head and neck movement present a greater risk than chiropractic manipulation for the kind of weak arteries that are of concern. By that measure, it’s risky to have your hair washed in one of those beauty parlor sinks where you have to lean way back (there’s even a name for this one, “the beauty parlor stroke”), play sports or even to turn your head to complete a turn while driving.

The condition that puts people at risk for this problem is very rare, Dr. Hayden said, noting that the statistics don’t support the level of concern being expressed. He pointed out that chiropractic is so low-risk that practitioners’ malpractice insurance costs only about one-tenth what an MD has to pay — around $1,300, on average, compared with $10,000 to $20,000 for general physicians.

THE TREND IS GOOD…

Meanwhile though, patients are voting with their feet — so maybe doctors should try to learn more about chiropractic care rather than stand in the way of progress. The number of chiropractic patients in this country doubled in the two decades from 1982 to 2002, and an estimated 10% of Americans have seen a chiropractor in the past year.

As for me, well, when my neck hurts, I visit my chiropractor… and I feel better. If you’re interested in exploring this form of alternative medical care, you can go to http://www.acatoday.org/search/memsearch.cfm to find an experienced, licensed practitioner in your area.

Source(s):

Robert A. Hayden, DC, PhD, founder and director of Iris City Chiropractic Center, PC, Griffin, Georgia, and spokesperson for the American Chiropractic Association.

WHY DOCTORS HATE CHIROPRACTORS
If you’ve ever complained of a terrifically sore neck or lingering back pain, I’ll bet someone suggested that you see a chiropractor. I visit my chiropractor when my recurrent neck pain flares up (as in, when I spend too many hours in front of my computer for too many days in a row), and I know lots of other people who see chiropractors, too. Now research is affirming the efficacy of chiropractic care for a number of conditions, and this trend may be further stoked by changes brought about by health-care reform.
For many complaints, including such varied and seemingly unrelated ones as headaches and digestive distress as well as back and neck problems, chiropractic care can often provide safe, effective and fast-working treatment — and (unusual for natural therapies) most insurance plans cover it. However, many mainstream medical doctors aren’t fans. Their reasons aren’t always clear but seem to lie somewhere on the spectrum between being worried that chiropractic care is not safe and feeling threatened that good chiropractors may take away many of their patients.
THE TIME IS RIGHT
In a glass-is-half-full kind of way, today’s troubled health-care environment actually presents an opportunity for chiropractors to gain some long overdue respect — at least that’s a hope that’s currently afloat in the chiropractic community, I heard from Robert A. Hayden, DC, PhD, spokesperson for the American Chiropractic Association. A critical-care nurse for 20 years before becoming a chiropractor himself, Dr. Hayden explained that the nation’s ongoing and pressing concern about health-care costs and treatment efficacy is a good backdrop against which to understand the many ways chiropractic care can help patients.
Why are doctors skeptical? Dr. Hayden told me that one of his regular patients is an orthopedic surgeon — but another orthopedist in his community won’t accept patient referrals from Dr. Hayden, and a nearby hospital won’t perform MRI scans for his patients. He believes this lack of acceptance is fueled by the very fact that chiropractic does not involve drugs and can be an effective alternative to hospitalization and surgery, which makes it attractive to both patients and the bean counters of health-care costs. The fact that Medicare now covers some chiropractic services enhances its credibility but also adds weight to worries that this natural, less invasive and less expensive alternative will divert health-care dollars away from medical doctors and hospitals.
WHAT WILL IT TAKE?
Key to the growing acceptance of chiropractic care is evidence-based research demonstrating that it is safe, clinically effective and cost-efficient. In the latest such effort, funded by Mercer Health and Benefits in San Francisco, Dr. Niteesh Choudry and colleagues reviewed existing literature on the efficacy of chiropractic. Their conclusion is that it works as well as or better than conventional modalities, including exercise programs, drug regimens and surgical intervention, for treating many forms of low back and neck pain, two of the most common medical complaints. Numerous other studies also support the effectiveness of chiropractic treatment for spine and neck issues in particular. For instance, a 2002 study of patients with nonspecific neck pain found that pain was reduced and function improved for 68.3% after seven weeks of chiropractic care, while the success rate for those in the care of general practitioners was only 36%. The patients of chiropractors missed work less frequently and needed less pain medication.
CAN IT CAUSE STROKE?
One very specific concern voiced by many medical doctors is that chiropractic neck manipulation has the potential to cause stroke, or — if done improperly — even death. The basis for this is a fairly rare and often undiagnosed condition in which the vertebral arteries in the neck are weakened, possibly by high levels of homocysteine. The fear is that in a vulnerable patient, twisting or stretching those arteries during a chiropractic manipulation could cause them to rupture.
To investigate whether this is a real danger, researchers at the University of Calgary (Alberta, Canada) studied vertebral arteries from several recently deceased people and found that it would take nine times the force of a typical chiropractic adjustment to damage these arteries and mobilize plaque. In fact, according to Dr. Hayden, normal head and neck movement present a greater risk than chiropractic manipulation for the kind of weak arteries that are of concern. By that measure, it’s risky to have your hair washed in one of those beauty parlor sinks where you have to lean way back (there’s even a name for this one, “the beauty parlor stroke”), play sports or even to turn your head to complete a turn while driving.
The condition that puts people at risk for this problem is very rare, Dr. Hayden said, noting that the statistics don’t support the level of concern being expressed. He pointed out that chiropractic is so low-risk that practitioners’ malpractice insurance costs only about one-tenth what an MD has to pay — around $1,300, on average, compared with $10,000 to $20,000 for general physicians.
THE TREND IS GOOD…
Meanwhile though, patients are voting with their feet — so maybe doctors should try to learn more about chiropractic care rather than stand in the way of progress. The number of chiropractic patients in this country doubled in the two decades from 1982 to 2002, and an estimated 10% of Americans have seen a chiropractor in the past year.
As for me, well, when my neck hurts, I visit my chiropractor… and I feel better. If you’re interested in exploring this form of alternative medical care, you can go to http://www.acatoday.org/search/memsearch.cfm to find an experienced, licensed practitioner in your area.
Source(s):
Robert A. Hayden, DC, PhD, founder and director of Iris City Chiropractic Center, PC, Griffin, Georgia, and spokesperson for the American Chiropractic Association.

How to Spice Up Grilling AND Make it Healthier: Even Red Meat!

The conventional nutritional dogma in the United States says you should limit the amount of meat you eat, especially red meat, because of its potential to harm your health.

Well, one of the reasons why eating meat is linked to heart disease and cancer often has little to do with the meat itself, and everything to do with how it’s cooked.

Any time you cook meat at high temperatures, whether you’re grilling, frying, broiling, etc., some pretty nasty chemicals are created:

• Heterocyclic Amines (HCAs): These form when food is cooked at high temperatures, and they’re linked to cancer. In terms of HCA, the worst part of the meat is the blackened section, which is why you should always avoid charring your meat, and never eat blackened sections.
• Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs): When fat drips onto the heat source, causing excess smoke, and the smoke surrounds your food, it can transfer cancer-causing PAHs to the meat.
• Advanced Glycation End Products (AGEs): When food is cooked at high temperatures (including when it is pasteurized or sterilized), it increases the formation of AGEs in your food. When you eat the food, it transfers the AGEs into your body. AGEs build up in your body over time leading to oxidative stress, inflammation and an increased risk of heart disease, diabetes and kidney disease.

It’s a given that eating meat, or any food, that contains these chemicals is not healthy. But what researchers are now uncovering is that adding spices and marinades to your meat before cooking can drastically cut down on the level of harmful substances created.

Before You Grill Another Burger or Cook Another Steak …

Get out your arsenal of spices and mix up a blend to use on beef, one for chicken and another for lamb or any other type of meat you cook on a regular basis.

In the latest study, adding a spice blend to burgers reduced the level of malondialdehyde, a chemical marker for oxidation, in the meat by 71 percent and levels in participants’ urine by 49 percent.

This benefit likely comes from spices’ potent antioxidant content. On a per gram fresh weight basis, oregano and other herbs rank even higher in antioxidant activity than fruits and vegetables, which are known to be high in antioxidants too.

You can experiment with a range of spices, as each will have a unique set of health benefits to offer, but even the popular stand-bys will help to boost the medicinal value of your meal. For instance, for the above study researchers used a blend of:

• Cloves
• Cinnamon
• Oregano
• Rosemary
• Ginger
• Black pepper
• Paprika
• Garlic powder

You can use the spices as a dry rub or mix them up into a healthy marinade. Choose those that appeal most to you flavor-wise, or alternatively you can choose them according to their health benefits too.

What Else Can Cut Down on Cooking Toxins?

I would recommend, if you’re going to cook your meat, that you combine it with spices every time to help reduce the health-harming substances that will inevitably be created. There are other tips, too, that keep cooked meat as healthy as possible, including:

• You can reduce the amount of PAHs when you grill by not cooking fatty meats, and by trimming the fat off before you grill.
• When grilling, cook your food with indirect heat, such as on a rack rather than directly on the coals. Cooking on a cedar plank is also helpful.
• Always avoid charring your meat (and don’t eat the black or brown parts).
• Cook meat partially before putting it on the grill, or cook smaller pieces of meat, which take less time to cook, and therefore give HCAs less time to form.
• You can reduce the amount of AGEs in your food by using an acidic marinade that contains lemon juice or vinegar.
• Marinating meats before grilling or broiling them can reduce HCAs (according to some experts by 90 percent or more). However, only use natural ingredients for marinades, and keep the coating thin to avoid charring.
• Flip your burgers often, as this will help cut down on HCAs.
• Add blueberries or cherries to your burgers, as they can also help prevent the formation of HCAs.

And for those of you who want to kick the health quotient of your meal up even further, I’d recommend forgoing the cooking stage altogether.

A Healthier Way to Eat Your Meat

I realize that asking most Americans to give up hot dogs, hamburgers, barbequed chicken and even grilled fish is almost sacrilegious. And really I’d rather see more Americans staying home to cook their own meals, even if it is on a grill, than going out for fast food or eating processed convenience foods.

So the first level would be to add homemade spice rubs, herb-enhanced marinades or even fresh blueberries to your meat prior to cooking it. This will impart some health benefits and also cut down on the harmful substances formed.

The next level, then, would be to use the same spice rubs and marinades, but eat the meat only lightly cooked or raw. Cooking reduces spices’ antioxidant levels by 45-70 percent, so not only will this result in higher levels of antioxidants, but also lower levels of toxins.

Meat products from animals raised outside in the sun are also rich in biophotons, which contain bio-information that controls complex vital processes in your body. The biophotons have the power to elevate your physical body to a higher oscillation or order, and this is manifested as a feeling of vitality and well-being. Cooking your food destroys these important biophotons, while creating toxic substances.

The Raw Option

I believe that most of the negative health associations of eating meat is related to the fact that the meat is cooked. Just as cooked vegetables are not as healthy as uncooked ones, meat undergoes damage when heated. Even if it isn’t heated over a barbecue, when you heat it over 170 degrees you will cause damage to the proteins similar to that occurs when milk is pasteurized.

You can easily avoid all these problems by eating your meat uncooked. The problem with doing that in our current culture is that most meat is raised under factory farming conditions. The animals are very unhealthy and likely to harbor infections that can harm you.

However, if you can find humanely raised organic meat, then that risk is virtually eliminated.

Again, in order for meat to be its healthiest, it should be organic and grass-fed, and it should be eaten raw or cooked as little as possible. If you like, you can quickly sear the meat on both sides, leaving the inside mostly raw. This gives the illusion that you’re eating cooked meat, with many of the benefits of raw.

So I would strongly encourage you to experiment with integrating this into your lifestyle. Many people have no problems eating sushi or steak tartar, so it is not such a big leap as you might think.

Spices are Great for All Your Meals

You needn’t limit spices in your diet to just burgers. Herbs and spices are at the top of the list of high ORAC value foods on planet Earth. ORAC is a standardized method of measuring the antioxidant capacity of different foods and supplements. The higher the ORAC score, the more effective a food is at neutralizing free radicals. The less free radicals you have, the healthier you will be.

So be adventurous in adding spices to all your meals, and be generous in the amounts you use. It will be worth it for the flavor enhancement alone, and the boost it will give your health is the icing on the cake!

Original Posting: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/05/08/adding-spices-to-meat-helps-decrease-damage-when-you-cook-it.aspx

Infant Vaccine Found to Contain Pig Virus: Please read if you have had your children vaccinated recently!

One million U.S. children, and about 30 million worldwide, have already received GlaxoSmithKline’s Rotarix vaccine. Now a research team has discovered it is contaminated with “a substantial amount” of DNA from a pig virus.

What is pig virus DNA doing in a vaccine intended to prevent rotavirus disease, which causes severe diarrhea and dehydration?

It’s anybody’s guess, although CNN reported that GlaxoSmitthKline detected the substance in the cell bank and the seed used to make the vaccine, “suggesting its presence from the early stages of vaccine development.”

It is actually common for vaccines to contain various animal matter, including foreign animal tissues containing genetic material (DNA/RNA), but even FDA Commissioner Dr. Margaret Hamburg told CNN:

“It [Pig virus DNA] should not be in this vaccine product and we want to understand how it got there.

It’s not an easy call and we spent many long hours debating the pros and cons but, because we have an alternative product and because the background rates of this disease are not so severe in this country, we felt that the judicious thing to do was to take a pause, to really ask the critical questions about what this material was doing in the vaccine, how it got there.”

Disturbing Findings in Rotarix and Two Other Common Childhood Vaccines

Dr. Eric Delwart is the researcher who, along with colleagues, made the discovery of contamination in Rotarix. Their intent was reportedly to “show that live attenuated vaccine only contained the expected viral genomes and no other,” but what they found told a different story.

Using new technology to test eight infectious attenuated viral vaccines, the results showed three of the vaccines contained “unexpected viral sequences”:

1. A measles vaccine was found to contain low levels of the retrovirus avian leukosis virus
2. Rotateq, Merck’s rotavirus vaccine, was found to contain a virus similar to simian (monkey) retrovirus
3. Rotarix (GlaxoSmithKine’s rotavirus vaccine) was found to contain  “significant levels” of porcine cirovirus 1

So in their tests, nearly 40 percent of the vaccines they tested contained viral contaminants. The implications of these findings on the alleged safety of the vaccine supply remains to be seen, but clearly there is contamination occurring that was a complete surprise to researchers, health officials and vaccine manufacturers alike.

As Barbara Loe Fisher, founder of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), said in her commentary on the Rotarix contamination issue:

“There are lots of questions about how the manufacturer of Rotarix vaccine and the FDA both missed the pig virus DNA contaminating the original seed stock and all doses of Rotarix vaccine given to more than one million American children in the past few years.

Is there state-of-the-art technology that is being used by private laboratories but not by drug companies and the FDA?

Why did the independent team of scientists, who found the contamination, notify the vaccine manufacturer first rather than also immediately reporting their finding directly to the FDA?

What about the significance of finding bird viral DNA in measles vaccine and the monkey viral DNA in RotaTeq vaccine?”

There are clearly a lot of unanswered questions right now. At the very least, it certainly makes you wonder what other “unknown” contaminants are lurking in vaccines. At worst, we could be injecting children with substances that could potentially cause serious health problems down the road.

Animal Ingredients Common in Vaccines

You should know that it is very common for vaccine manufacturers to use cells from animals and birds in their manufacturing process.

To put this in perspective, Barbara Loe Fisher has explained what animal material is par for the course in manufacturing the Rotarix vaccine for your children:

“Rotarix is a genetically engineered vaccine that GSK created by isolating human rotavirus strain infecting a child in Cincinnati and using African Green monkey kidney cells to produce the original viral seed stock from which all Rotarix vaccine has been made.

In the FDA licensing process, Rotarix had to meet certain FDA standards, that included demonstrating the vaccine was not contaminated with, for example TSE (Transmissable Spongiform Encephalopathy or “mad cow” disease, a brain wasting disease) or with cow viruses because bovine (cow) serum was used to prepare the original viral seed stock.

Porcine trypsin, an enzyme in the pancreatic juice of a pig, was also used to make the viral seed stock.”

So the fact that Rotarix contains animal material is not a surprise … it’s the type of animal material, an unexpected variety, that has even the FDA raising their eyebrows.

Why it’s Dangerous to Have Various Animal DNA in Vaccines …

Both the FDA and GlaxoSmithKline spokespeople continue to state that no safety risk has been uncovered from the contamination, at least not yet.

Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health, said “a substantial amount” of the DNA was found in the vaccine. But, he stressed, “there is no evidence that it causes any disease. … There is no evidence that it ever does anything.”

Dr. Paul Offit added, “The PCV1 virus they found is an orphan virus, i.e., it is not associated with disease”.

Of course there are no studies provided or have ever been done to show this, it doesn’t stop them from making these statements without any facts to back up their safety assurance, despite the fact that SV40 from monkeys has been associated with cancer in multiple studies.

History has shown that it can indeed be very dangerous when an animal virus unintentionally enters the vaccine supply.

During the 1950s and 1960s, the polio vaccine, which is still given in the United States, typically four times during a child’s first 16 months of life, was widely contaminated with the monkey virus, SV40, which had gotten into the vaccine during the manufacturing process (monkey kidney cells, where SV40 thrived, were used to develop polio vaccines).

In lab tests, the virus was found to cause several different types of cancer, including brain cancer, and now SV40 is showing up in a variety of human cancers such as lung, brain, bone and lymphatic.

According to the authors of The Virus and the Vaccine: The True Story of a Cancer-Causing Monkey Virus, Contaminated Polio Vaccine, and the Millions of Americans Exposed, leading scientists and government officials turned their heads to repeated studies showing that SV40 was in the vaccine, and even today some well-known agencies are still dismissing study results.

The virus is even showing up in children too young to have received the contaminated vaccine, and some experts are now suggesting the contaminated virus may have been in the polio vaccine up until as late as 1999.

It is because of risks like this that Barbara Loe Fisher said:

“With mounting evidence that cross-species transfer of viruses can occur, the United States should no longer be using animal tissues to produce vaccines.”

This is also the same reason why Donald Miller, a cardiac surgeon and professor of surgery at the University of Washington, suggests in his more User-Friendly Vaccination Schedule that if you choose to get your child vaccinated against polio, you request only an inactivated (dead) virus vaccine that is cultured in human cells, not monkey kidney cells.

The United States no longer uses the live oral polio vaccine, so parents don’t really have to ask for the injected version. However, if you live internationally, this is still an issue.

Are the Benefits of Rotarix Worth the Risks?

Even without a potential contamination scare, there are serious risks to every vaccine. So before vaccinating you really need to be certain that the benefits will outweigh those risks.

In the case of Rotarix, along with RotaTeq (a similar vaccine made by Merck), the benefits are very questionable, especially if you live in the United States or another developed country.

Rotavirus is very contagious and does cause more than 500,000 deaths in young children each year, but this is mostly in developing countries. In the United States, rotavirus is responsible for only “several dozen” deaths a year, according to Hamburg.

Typically, when a child in the United States contracts rotavirus, and most do, only rest and fluids are required to recover. This infection also provides natural immunity that will protect your child for life.

As NVIC writes

“The CDC estimates that, by age 3, almost every US child has had a case of rotavirus. Once a child has been infected with a strain of rotavirus, he or she develops antibodies and is either immune for life or has a milder case if infected with that same strain in the future.

Most healthy children, who are infected with several strains of rotavirus in the first few years of life, develop lifelong natural immunity to rotavirus infection.”

The rotavirus vaccine, meanwhile, has shown little benefit for rotavirus rates in the United States. According to NVIC:

“Today, even though almost all US infants receive vaccines for rotavirus, and despite efforts to improve the management of childhood rotavirus-associated diarrhea, hospitalizations of children in the U.S. with the disease have not significantly declined in the past two decades.”

Along with showing little benefit for a disease that is typically entirely treatable with fluids and rest, a recent drug review by the FDA found that Rotarix is associated with a significant increase in pneumonia-related deaths in children, compared to a placebo.

So with this particular vaccine, children are taking on serious risks with what appears to be very little benefit — and that was before the contamination was uncovered.

The moral of the story?

Whatever you do, please do your homework before subjecting your children to any vaccine. A great way to get started is to simply use the Search Feature at the top of each of my Web pages and search my site as it contains a litany of research on vaccine safety, and the lack thereof.

Original Post: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/04/17/major-vaccine-suspended-due-to-contamination-with-pig-virus.aspx

Fatty Foods are Addicting: In case you were born yesterday…

Scientists have finally confirmed what the rest of us have suspected for years: Bacon, cheesecake, and other delicious yet fattening foods may be addictive.

A new study in rats suggests that high-fat, high-calorie foods affect the brain in much the same way as cocaine and heroin. When rats consume these foods in great enough quantities, it leads to compulsive eating habits that resemble drug addiction, the study found.

Doing drugs such as cocaine and eating too much junk food both gradually overload the so-called pleasure centers in the brain, according to Paul J. Kenny, Ph.D., an associate professor of molecular therapeutics at the Scripps Research Institute, in Jupiter, Florida. Eventually the pleasure centers “crash,” and achieving the same pleasure–or even just feeling normal–requires increasing amounts of the drug or food, says Kenny, the lead author of the study.

“People know intuitively that there’s more to [overeating] than just willpower,” he says. “There’s a system in the brain that’s been turned on or over-activated, and that’s driving [overeating] at some subconscious level.”

In the study, published in the journal Nature Neuroscience, Kenny and his co-author studied three groups of lab rats for 40 days. One of the groups was fed regular rat food. A second was fed bacon, sausage, cheesecake, frosting, and other fattening, high-calorie foods–but only for one hour each day. The third group was allowed to pig out on the unhealthy foods for up to 23 hours a day.

Not surprisingly, the rats that gorged themselves on the human food quickly became obese. But their brains also changed. By monitoring implanted brain electrodes, the researchers found that the rats in the third group gradually developed a tolerance to the pleasure the food gave them and had to eat more to experience a high.

They began to eat compulsively, to the point where they continued to do so in the face of pain. When the researchers applied an electric shock to the rats’ feet in the presence of the food, the rats in the first two groups were frightened away from eating. But the obese rats were not. “Their attention was solely focused on consuming food,” says Kenny.

In previous studies, rats have exhibited similar brain changes when given unlimited access to cocaine or heroin. And rats have similarly ignored punishment to continue consuming cocaine, the researchers note.

The fact that junk food could provoke this response isn’t entirely surprising, says Dr.Gene-Jack Wang, M.D., the chair of the medical department at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Brookhaven National Laboratory, in Upton, New York.

“We make our food very similar to cocaine now,” he says.

Coca leaves have been used since ancient times, he points out, but people learned to purify or alter cocaine to deliver it more efficiently to their brains (by injecting or smoking it, for instance). This made the drug more addictive.

According to Wang, food has evolved in a similar way. “We purify our food,” he says. “Our ancestors ate whole grains, but we’re eating white bread. American Indians ate corn; we eat corn syrup.”

The ingredients in purified modern food cause people to “eat unconsciously and unnecessarily,” and will also prompt an animal to “eat like a drug abuser [uses drugs],” says Wang.

The neurotransmitter dopamine appears to be responsible for the behavior of the overeating rats, according to the study. Dopamine is involved in the brain’s pleasure (or reward) centers, and it also plays a role in reinforcing behavior. “It tells the brain something has happened and you should learn from what just happened,” says Kenny.

Overeating caused the levels of a certain dopamine receptor in the brains of the obese rats to drop, the study found. In humans, low levels of the same receptors have been associated with drug addiction and obesity, and may be genetic, Kenny says.

However, that doesn’t mean that everyone born with lower dopamine receptor levels is destined to become an addict or to overeat. As Wang points out, environmental factors, and not just genes, are involved in both behaviors.

Wang also cautions that applying the results of animal studies to humans can be tricky. For instance, he says, in studies of weight-loss drugs, rats have lost as much as 30 percent of their weight, but humans on the same drug have lost less than 5 percent of their weight. “You can’t mimic completely human behavior, but [animal studies] can give you a clue about what can happen in humans,” Wang says.

Although he acknowledges that his research may not directly translate to humans, Kenny says the findings shed light on the brain mechanisms that drive overeating and could even lead to new treatments for obesity.

“If we could develop therapeutics for drug addiction, those same drugs may be good for obesity as well,” he says.

Original Post:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/03/28/fatty.foods.brain/index.html

By Sarah Klein, Health.com

Vitamin D: Protects against the Flu, Cancer, Heart Disease, and much much more!

A new study has confirmed that vitamin D plays an important role in activating your immune defenses against infectious diseases like the flu. Vitamin D helps produce antibacterial peptides that help protect against the flu. That is why in winter, when there is little sunshine, people are more prone to vitamin D deficiency and getting infected with flu viruses.

This confirmation is exciting, if for no other reason than the fact that curing vitamin D deficiency is not only inexpensive – it may in some cases cost you nothing! And, optimizing your vitamin D levels can have a remarkably positive effect on your overall health and helps protect you against a vast number of diseases that are far more serious than the flu. Vitamin D has now been shown to help prevent breast and other types of cancer, heart disease, diabetes, depression, autoimmune disease, infectious diseases, hypertension, colon cancer, and falls in the elderly, to name only a few.

Vitamin D actually works by increasing your body’s production of 2-300 different antimicrobital peptides that are actually far more effective than any synthetic antibiotic or antiviral. They do this at a fraction of the cost and at virtually no toxicity.

Recommended Daily Intake for Optimal Health

Based on the most recent research, the current recommendation is 35 IU’s of vitamin D per pound of body weight.

So for a child weighing 40 pounds, the recommended average dose would be 1,400 IU’s daily, and for a 170-pound adult, the dose would be nearly 6,000 IU’s.

However, it’s important to realize that vitamin D requirements are highly individual, as your vitamin D status is dependent on numerous factors, such as the color of your skin, your location, and how much sunshine you’re exposed to on a regular basis.

So, although these recommendations may put you closer to the ballpark of what most people likely need, it is simply impossible to make a blanket recommendation that will cover everyone’s needs.

Most babies should take a daily vitamin D supplement, a new study shows.

Only 1% to 13% of infants under 1 year now get a vitamin D supplement, available in inexpensive drops, according to a study published online today in Pediatrics.

Those drops are needed, the study says, because only 5% to 37% of American infants met the standard for vitamin D set by the American Academy of Pediatrics in 2008: 400 international units a day.

Vitamin D strengthens bone and the immune system and also appears to prevent type 1 diabetes, heart disease and cancer, the paper says.

Few breast-fed babies — 5% to 13%, depending on their age — received the recommended amount of vitamin D, researchers estimated. Although breast milk is the perfect food in every other way, it’s often low in vitamin D, says pediatrician Nicolas Stettler, a spokesman for the pediatrics academy who wasn’t involved in the study. Because humans originated in equatorial areas with year-round sunshine, babies in the distant past wouldn’t have needed to get vitamin D from breast milk, he says.

Yet many formula-fed infants don’t get enough, either. Babies need to drink about 32 ounces of fortified formula a day to get 400 international units of vitamin D, says study author Cria Perrine of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Babies younger than 6 months can rarely drink that much. A supplement can give babies all they need.

Many mothers also are vitamin D-deficient.

Only 1% to 13% of infants under 1 year now get a vitamin D supplement, available in inexpensive drops, according to a study published online today in Pediatrics.
Those drops are needed, the study says, because only 5% to 37% of American infants met the standard for vitamin D set by the American Academy of Pediatrics in 2008: 400 international units a day.
Vitamin D strengthens bone and the immune system and also appears to prevent type 1 diabetes, heart disease and cancer, the paper says.
Few breast-fed babies — 5% to 13%, depending on their age — received the recommended amount of vitamin D, researchers estimated. Although breast milk is the perfect food in every other way, it’s often low in vitamin D, says pediatrician Nicolas Stettler, a spokesman for the pediatrics academy who wasn’t involved in the study. Because humans originated in equatorial areas with year-round sunshine, babies in the distant past wouldn’t have needed to get vitamin D from breast milk, he says.
Yet many formula-fed infants don’t get enough, either. Babies need to drink about 32 ounces of fortified formula a day to get 400 international units of vitamin D, says study author Cria Perrine of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Babies younger than 6 months can rarely drink that much. A supplement can give babies all they need.
Many mothers also are vitamin D-deficient.

At our office we carry a few different Vitamin D supplements,  something for everybody!

original posts:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2010-03-22-vitamind22_ST_N.htm

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2009/10/10/Vitamin-D-Experts-Reveal-the-Truth.aspx

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/03/25/vitamin-d-deficiency-is-why-you-get-flu.aspx

New Warning About Everyday Poison Linked to Alzheimer’s, ADHD, and Autism

Dr. David Ayoub is a radiologist and a physician, and has become a specialist on the additives and preservatives used in vaccines. He was a presenter at the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) Conference in Washington D.C. last year.

Here he discusses the practice of using aluminum as an adjuvant, and why he believes aluminum may be far more toxic than thimerosal in vaccines.

Dr. Mercola’s Comments:

Dr. Ayoub was, as many of you are, very concerned about mercury (thimerosal) in vaccines for a number of years, and attended a number of autism conferences that featured physicians who were highlighting the dangers of mercury.

However, a few personal encounters heightened his interest in another toxic metal frequently used in vaccines, namely aluminum.

Parents of autistic children kept pointing out the fact that their children’s heavy metal toxicity profiles showed high amounts of aluminum, and they wanted to know what that meant.

Secondly, a well respected nutritionist who deals with industrial aluminum toxicity showed him toxicity profiles of middle school children who had ADHD. In his estimate, 90 percent of the children in one particular school had developed ADHD during the course of a single year, and their toxicity profiles showed massive amounts of aluminum.

In addition, he did a pilot study with Dr. Usman, who treats autism with biomedicine, and when he evaluated the aluminum burden of these autistic children, he found that high percentage of them also had very high aluminum burdens.

All of these events led him to look deeper into the aluminum issue, which we discuss at length in this interview.

Why is Aluminum Used in Vaccines?

Mercury (thimerosal) exposure has declined significantly since it was eliminated from the single-dose vials of most childhood vaccines, yet autism rates have continued to skyrocket. This has led many to assume that mercury isn’t a problem, and anyone questioning the safety of vaccines is considered to be a hysterical wingnut.

However, while mercury use has decreased, the use of aluminum additives has increased!

Aluminum, like any other adjuvant, is added to the vaccine in order to boost the host’s immune response to the antigen. The antigen is what your body responds to and makes antibodies against (the virus being injected). By boosting your body’s immune response, the vaccine manufacturer can use a smaller amount of antigen, which makes production less expensive.

Interestingly enough, according to Dr. Ayoub, even our modern medical literature admits that how this happens exactly is still a mystery. And it’s not a consistent finding. He mentions a couple of studies on the more recent HPV vaccine, which found that the aluminum adjuvant had no effect at all on the immune response…

So, although aluminum is frequently added to vaccines for this particular purpose, no one knows with any degree of confidence that it actually makes a more effective vaccine.

Is Aluminum a Heavy Metal?

Aluminum is by many considered to be a heavy metal. However, based on the Periodic Table, it’s just shy of a heavy metal. So it’s called a “light metal.”

But regardless of its precise classification, aluminum is in the metal grouping, and it’s a common compound.

You will find aluminum in the earth’s crust, and in air, soil and water. However, although aluminum is a common, “natural” substance, it’s important to realize that it has absolutely no biological role inside your body.

In fact, we already know that aluminum is a poison.

Which Vaccines Contain Aluminum?

Many vaccines contain aluminum, including:

Hepatitis A

Hepatitis B

DTaP (diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis)

Hib vaccine

Pneumococcal vaccine

Gardasil (HPV vaccine)

This is NOT an all-inclusive list, however. Your best bet is to read through the package insert of each vaccine in question.

You can find a comprehensive list of approved vaccines on the FDA’s website, with links to each package insert.

The amount of aluminum in each vaccine will vary. However, according to Dr. Ayoub, it’s important to realize that the toxicity is not entirely dependent on dose, but also on how it’s distributed in your body.

For example, a small dose released rapidly from the injection site into your body can cause a rapid rise in blood aluminum levels. So a small dose released quickly may be much more toxic than a large dose that ends up staying longer in the tissue at the injection site.

The variables of personal differences and differences in how the injection is given are too numerous to count, and they may play a role in how toxic a shot ends up being once injected into your body.

How Much Aluminum is Your Child Getting Through Vaccines?

Dr. Ayoub has identified one vaccine in particular as being one of the absolute worst in terms of aluminum content – Pediatrix. It’s a combination vaccine, which contains 850 mcg of elemental aluminum.

The average aluminum content per vaccine ranges between 200 to 400 mcg. Others contain less, such as Prevnar, which has 125 mcg of aluminum.

Adding to the problem, however, is the fact that many children end up receiving multiple vaccines at a time. In effect, children are getting concentrations of aluminum that are 10 to 20 times higher than mercury.

Based on the number of vaccines given, children today are receiving 17 shots that contain aluminum, compared to four vaccines in the 1970s into the mid-80s. According to Dr. Ayoub’s calculations, the milligram dose of aluminum received has more than doubled in that time.

This can have significant implications, as aluminum is not only toxic in and of itself, but it also impairs your body’s ability to excrete mercury, and it impairs glutathione synthesis. As a consequence, aluminum will make whatever amount of mercury you have in your system even more toxic.

Remember, you and your children are exposed to mercury from other sources as well, not just vaccines. Fish and amalgam dental fillings are two major sources of mercury exposure as well.

Problems with the Legal Limits on Aluminum

In the U.S., the FDA sets the guidelines for what and how much aluminum is allowed in vaccines. According to the FDA, the maximum amount of allowable elemental aluminum is 850 mcg per vaccine.

Clearly, it makes a major difference if this amount is injected into a small infant or an adult, but the FDA makes no distinction to that effect.

In fact, when Dr. Ayoub dug deeper into the FDA regulations on aluminum, he discovered that the limitation of 850 mcg per vaccine is based on the effectiveness of the adjuvant role of aluminum and has nothing to do with limitations based on safety whatsoever!

Shocking?

Yes! But not surprising, at this point.

However, it may be wise to keep this fact in mind, as those who argue that the amounts of aluminum in vaccines is a “legally safe dose” are really just citing a regulatory guideline that is based solely on the efficacy of the vaccine, and NOT based on any safety data whatsoever.

Approach to Treatment and Prevention of Aluminum Ttoxicity

1) Avoid/minimize exposures

Test drinking water with and without filter

Avoid cooking with aluminum utensils/pans

Never store food in contact with aluminum

Use non aluminum baking soda, deodorant, toothpaste

Avoid aluminum-containing vaccines, or separate multiple aluminum- containing vaccines by 2-4 weeks, only take single formulas/shots

Avoid drinks in aluminum pouches/cans, especially if they contain citrates/ascorbates which enhance aluminum absorption

Take vitamin C and fruit juices on an empty stomach

Minimize exposure to calcium carbonate-containing medicines

2) Testing for body levels

Blood aluminum only useful in cases of large, acute exposures (i.e., acute vaccine reaction) for chronic exposures: hair analysis, post-provocative (EDTA or DFO) urine metals, urinary porphyrin testing

3) Treatment of deleterious actions of chronic aluminum exposure maintain normal serum vitamin D levels

Melatonin has powerful antioxidant properties and is particularly depleted from aluminum exposure

Curcumin

Supplements or foods that dirve the methylation process (methionine cycle), i.e., B6, B12, folic acid, folinic acid, etc

Natural chelation like cilantro

Medial Chelation:

Calcium disodium EDTA pulls lead and aluminum. It is also contaminated with aluminum, as many calcium-containing products are. Oral dose is easiest but rectal suppository is available.

(Detoxamin) and may have the added benefit of low absorption of the aluminum contaminant that requires iron-transport system found mostly in small bowel as opposed to the rectum. Intravenous EDTA can be used by healthcare professional.

Medical chelation has been performed for many years using deferoxamine (DFO). This is a potent chelator for iron and aluminum and has been used  mostly  by nephrologists in treating aluminum toxicity from oral phosphate binders once used in patients with chronic renal failure. This is potent enough to reverse severe acute neurotoxicity from aluminum poisoning but has potential serious side effects and can only be used by a physician..

Dr. David Ayoub is a radiologist and a physician, and has become a specialist on the additives and preservatives used in vaccines. He was a presenter at the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) Conference in Washington D.C. last year.Here he discusses the practice of using aluminum as an adjuvant, and why he believes aluminum may be far more toxic than thimerosal in vaccines.
Dr. Mercola’s Comments:
Dr. Ayoub was, as many of you are, very concerned about mercury (thimerosal) in vaccines for a number of years, and attended a number of autism conferences that featured physicians who were highlighting the dangers of mercury.However, a few personal encounters heightened his interest in another toxic metal frequently used in vaccines, namely aluminum.Parents of autistic children kept pointing out the fact that their children’s heavy metal toxicity profiles showed high amounts of aluminum, and they wanted to know what that meant.Secondly, a well respected nutritionist who deals with industrial aluminum toxicity showed him toxicity profiles of middle school children who had ADHD. In his estimate, 90 percent of the children in one particular school had developed ADHD during the course of a single year, and their toxicity profiles showed massive amounts of aluminum.In addition, he did a pilot study with Dr. Usman, who treats autism with biomedicine, and when he evaluated the aluminum burden of these autistic children, he found that high percentage of them also had very high aluminum burdens.All of these events led him to look deeper into the aluminum issue, which we discuss at length in this interview.Why is Aluminum Used in Vaccines?Mercury (thimerosal) exposure has declined significantly since it was eliminated from the single-dose vials of most childhood vaccines, yet autism rates have continued to skyrocket. This has led many to assume that mercury isn’t a problem, and anyone questioning the safety of vaccines is considered to be a hysterical wingnut.However, while mercury use has decreased, the use of aluminum additives has increased!Aluminum, like any other adjuvant, is added to the vaccine in order to boost the host’s immune response to the antigen. The antigen is what your body responds to and makes antibodies against (the virus being injected). By boosting your body’s immune response, the vaccine manufacturer can use a smaller amount of antigen, which makes production less expensive.Interestingly enough, according to Dr. Ayoub, even our modern medical literature admits that how this happens exactly is still a mystery. And it’s not a consistent finding. He mentions a couple of studies on the more recent HPV vaccine, which found that the aluminum adjuvant had no effect at all on the immune response…So, although aluminum is frequently added to vaccines for this particular purpose, no one knows with any degree of confidence that it actually makes a more effective vaccine.Is Aluminum a Heavy Metal?Aluminum is by many considered to be a heavy metal. However, based on the Periodic Table, it’s just shy of a heavy metal. So it’s called a “light metal.”But regardless of its precise classification, aluminum is in the metal grouping, and it’s a common compound.You will find aluminum in the earth’s crust, and in air, soil and water. However, although aluminum is a common, “natural” substance, it’s important to realize that it has absolutely no biological role inside your body.In fact, we already know that aluminum is a poison.Which Vaccines Contain Aluminum?Many vaccines contain aluminum, including:Hepatitis AHepatitis BDTaP (diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis)Hib vaccinePneumococcal vaccineGardasil (HPV vaccine)This is NOT an all-inclusive list, however. Your best bet is to read through the package insert of each vaccine in question.You can find a comprehensive list of approved vaccines on the FDA’s website, with links to each package insert.The amount of aluminum in each vaccine will vary. However, according to Dr. Ayoub, it’s important to realize that the toxicity is not entirely dependent on dose, but also on how it’s distributed in your body.For example, a small dose released rapidly from the injection site into your body can cause a rapid rise in blood aluminum levels. So a small dose released quickly may be much more toxic than a large dose that ends up staying longer in the tissue at the injection site.The variables of personal differences and differences in how the injection is given are too numerous to count, and they may play a role in how toxic a shot ends up being once injected into your body.How Much Aluminum is Your Child Getting Through Vaccines?Dr. Ayoub has identified one vaccine in particular as being one of the absolute worst in terms of aluminum content – Pediatrix. It’s a combination vaccine, which contains 850 mcg of elemental aluminum.The average aluminum content per vaccine ranges between 200 to 400 mcg. Others contain less, such as Prevnar, which has 125 mcg of aluminum.Adding to the problem, however, is the fact that many children end up receiving multiple vaccines at a time. In effect, children are getting concentrations of aluminum that are 10 to 20 times higher than mercury.Based on the number of vaccines given, children today are receiving 17 shots that contain aluminum, compared to four vaccines in the 1970s into the mid-80s. According to Dr. Ayoub’s calculations, the milligram dose of aluminum received has more than doubled in that time.This can have significant implications, as aluminum is not only toxic in and of itself, but it also impairs your body’s ability to excrete mercury, and it impairs glutathione synthesis. As a consequence, aluminum will make whatever amount of mercury you have in your system even more toxic.Remember, you and your children are exposed to mercury from other sources as well, not just vaccines. Fish and amalgam dental fillings are two major sources of mercury exposure as well.Problems with the Legal Limits on AluminumIn the U.S., the FDA sets the guidelines for what and how much aluminum is allowed in vaccines. According to the FDA, the maximum amount of allowable elemental aluminum is 850 mcg per vaccine.Clearly, it makes a major difference if this amount is injected into a small infant or an adult, but the FDA makes no distinction to that effect.In fact, when Dr. Ayoub dug deeper into the FDA regulations on aluminum, he discovered that the limitation of 850 mcg per vaccine is based on the effectiveness of the adjuvant role of aluminum and has nothing to do with limitations based on safety whatsoever!Shocking?Yes! But not surprising, at this point.However, it may be wise to keep this fact in mind, as those who argue that the amounts of aluminum in vaccines is a “legally safe dose” are really just citing a regulatory guideline that is based solely on the efficacy of the vaccine, and NOT based on any safety data whatsoever.Approach to Treatment and Prevention of Aluminum Ttoxicity 1) Avoid/minimize exposures Test drinking water with and without filter Avoid cooking with aluminum utensils/pans Never store food in contact with aluminum Use non aluminum baking soda, deodorant, toothpaste Avoid aluminum-containing vaccines, or separate multiple aluminum- containing vaccines by 2-4 weeks, only take single formulas/shots Avoid drinks in aluminum pouches/cans, especially if they contain citrates/ascorbates which enhance aluminum absorption Take vitamin C and fruit juices on an empty stomach Minimize exposure to calcium carbonate-containing medicines     2) Testing for body levels      Blood aluminum only useful in cases of large, acute exposures (i.e., acute vaccine reaction) for chronic exposures: hair analysis, post-provocative (EDTA or DFO) urine metals, urinary porphyrin testing 3) Treatment of deleterious actions of chronic aluminum exposure maintain normal serum vitamin D levels Melatonin has powerful antioxidant properties and is particularly depleted from aluminum exposure Curcumin Supplements or foods that dirve the methylation process (methionine cycle), i.e., B6, B12, folic acid, folinic acid, etc     Natural chelation like cilantro          Medial Chelation:
Calcium disodium EDTA pulls lead and aluminum. It is also contaminated with aluminum, as many calcium-containing products are. Oral dose is easiest but rectal suppository is available.(Detoxamin) and may have the added benefit of low absorption of the aluminum contaminant that requires iron-transport system found mostly in small bowel as opposed to the rectum. Intravenous EDTA can be used by healthcare professional.
Medical chelation has been performed for many years using deferoxamine (DFO). This is a potent chelator for iron and aluminum and has been used  mostly  by nephrologists in treating aluminum toxicity from oral phosphate binders once used in patients with chronic renal failure. This is potent enough to reverse severe acute neurotoxicity from aluminum poisoning but has potential serious side effects and can only be used by a physician…

Original posting: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/03/20/david-ayoub-interview-february-2010.aspx

link has video as well.