It has been a long time since I have said anything about coffee.
In the past I have not liked the addiction people seem to have to it, namely the caffeine. But green tea, which in some cases has almost as much caffeine, turned out to be a super food. The extract I use in my vitamins has all the EGCG and polyphenols but none of the caffeine, so I had no need to bring up the issues.
Green tea also has theanine also called “calming amino acid” which seems to reduce the adrenal effects of caffeine.
But coffee has come of age a bit since then and there are several benefits worth noting. Besides, I doubt you gave up your morning cuppa’ joe just ‘cause I said so!!!
So first we can talk about the fact that coffee is an herbal and thus has its own set of polyphenols, which makes it a potential “health food”.
In truth, all the research on the ill effects of coffee never really came up with anything conclusive, although at one time it was “accused” of being a risk factor for pancreatic cancer. I can remember one researcher reporting no negative finds and admitting there were no proven ill effects of coffee but ending his paper with “this still does not exonerate coffee”.
I found the use of the word exonerate almost funny since I didn’t realize coffee was on trial!
The truth is coffee has survived all the attempts at bashing it and has come out, well, smelling like roses or at least coffee scented roses.
Much of the recent research on the benefits of coffee comes out of an attempt to stop the hemorrhage of people going over to green tea, which ranks up there with Vitamin D and fish oil! LOL! Well at least the extract does because few Americans will drink the requisite 6 cups a day of green tea needed to get the benefits.
So what have we learned about coffee using modern research tools?
1) It is safe to consume in the quantities that most Americans use on a daily basis, and there is no evidence of any kind to support harm.
2) It’s apparently good for diabetes, with a risk reduction on the order of 25+% for caffeinated and 33% for decaf. The absence of caffeine, by the way, does not explain the difference, so no one is sure about why there is a difference.
3) It improves liver health.
4) Regular consumption decreases pro-inflammatory chemical levels in the body and reduces adiponectin which, if you read my newsletters, you’ll know is a bad byproduct of too many fat cells. Some of the compounds in coffee that may be healthful are magnesium, antioxidant lignans and chlorogenic acids similar to those found in chlorella.
5) The green bean version of coffee is gaining popularity and seems to have even more polyphenols.
So what does all this mean?
Well, it means that coffee is probably not a bad a choice, as I used to say, and may even be a good one. By the way, I do still enjoy a rare cup here and there but when I make it I make it right. Since I like espresso, which as you may know is relatively low in caffeine, I can tell you the machine you use to make any kind of coffee, especially espresso, makes a huge difference.
So, if you are going to do it, do it right and treat yourself to a fabulous machine and you will get a fabulous cup of coffee every time.
Here is the place I would go if I were you: 1st in Coffee.
I think we will continue to see more and more health benefits of coffee borne out over the next year or two, especially since Nestle has a vested interest in proving its worth!
‘Til next time, enjoy your cup and don’t forget to visit the folks at 1st in Coffee at: http://www.1stincoffee.com/ and no I don’t get any money for sending you there I just think they are great people with great products.
Doc
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Thursday, April 8, 2010
Fish oil gene inserted in cows
Chinese scientists may have solved the sustainability issue for Omega-3 fatty acids.
Recently their first “genetically modified cow” turned 9 months old and was deemed to be in perfect health.
Two more such cows are being bred now.
Through the miracle of genetic insertion a fish oil gene from telost fish (salmon, etc which produce high levels of Omega-3 fish oils) was inserted into the cow’s genome and lo and behold the cow’s milk is expected to produce 10 times the normal amount of Omega 3 fats normally found in cows milk but without the fish taste.
Given the concern over the sustainability of Omega-3 feeder fish to keep the Omega-3 levels in oily fish (over 50% of which are now farmed) at a high enough level to keep humans healthy when they eat fish, this comes as great news.
In a somewhat similar note fish oil has been given to cows and other grazing animals because it cuts down on methane producing flatulence. Funny as it may sound, this is a major source of greenhouse gases and would be a great way to reduce the greenhouse effect.
Dr Dave comments:
I have the perfect solution for keeping the Omega-3 levels in fish at high levels. Instead of asking people to consume krill or krill oil, which is not natural to any human population anywhere, mix the krill in with the fish chow and viola, plenty of Omega-3 for the fish to eat and integrate into their livers. And when they are harvested it will take fewer of them to produce fish oil.
Along the sustainability lines, there is already good evidence that harvest caps are beginning to show gains in fish populations and the World Fish Council state the global fish harvest has not increased at all in the past 20 years.
Given the climate gate issues, we have to look at some of the “fish panic” a little more objectively as well.
Clearly proper husbandry is needed and clearly everyone is aware of that.
The “solution”, while novel, is a great one since cows are not in danger of being over harvested and if the Omega-3 is of the EPA and DHA variety it could contribute greatly to human health!
We will still probably need to purify the oil that comes from cow’s milk as cows graze on pesticide laden areas and are exposed to environmental toxins as well but it will be a different set of toxins than in fish.
Finally, the most important point in this may be that gene insertion is here now. Gene repair for human beings, as we discussed at length in the Manhattan Beach Project, must truly be just around the corner.
You can see Dr Dave’s participation in the MBP on Youtube. This is the first of about 7 segments.
Recently their first “genetically modified cow” turned 9 months old and was deemed to be in perfect health.
Two more such cows are being bred now.
Through the miracle of genetic insertion a fish oil gene from telost fish (salmon, etc which produce high levels of Omega-3 fish oils) was inserted into the cow’s genome and lo and behold the cow’s milk is expected to produce 10 times the normal amount of Omega 3 fats normally found in cows milk but without the fish taste.
Given the concern over the sustainability of Omega-3 feeder fish to keep the Omega-3 levels in oily fish (over 50% of which are now farmed) at a high enough level to keep humans healthy when they eat fish, this comes as great news.
In a somewhat similar note fish oil has been given to cows and other grazing animals because it cuts down on methane producing flatulence. Funny as it may sound, this is a major source of greenhouse gases and would be a great way to reduce the greenhouse effect.
Dr Dave comments:
I have the perfect solution for keeping the Omega-3 levels in fish at high levels. Instead of asking people to consume krill or krill oil, which is not natural to any human population anywhere, mix the krill in with the fish chow and viola, plenty of Omega-3 for the fish to eat and integrate into their livers. And when they are harvested it will take fewer of them to produce fish oil.
Along the sustainability lines, there is already good evidence that harvest caps are beginning to show gains in fish populations and the World Fish Council state the global fish harvest has not increased at all in the past 20 years.
Given the climate gate issues, we have to look at some of the “fish panic” a little more objectively as well.
Clearly proper husbandry is needed and clearly everyone is aware of that.
The “solution”, while novel, is a great one since cows are not in danger of being over harvested and if the Omega-3 is of the EPA and DHA variety it could contribute greatly to human health!
We will still probably need to purify the oil that comes from cow’s milk as cows graze on pesticide laden areas and are exposed to environmental toxins as well but it will be a different set of toxins than in fish.
Finally, the most important point in this may be that gene insertion is here now. Gene repair for human beings, as we discussed at length in the Manhattan Beach Project, must truly be just around the corner.
You can see Dr Dave’s participation in the MBP on Youtube. This is the first of about 7 segments.
Monday, April 5, 2010
Ten Reasons Why Obama Care Needs Fish Oil
President Obama has passed some historic legislation into being. Whether it works or not depends on how much it actually costs. For starters let me tell you why Pharmaceutical Grade fish oil is essential for Obama Care.
1) It does what no prescription drug can ever do.
2) It’s all natural and comparatively almost side effects free even in big does.
3) It reduces death and infirmity from several major causes of aging and death in this country including heart disease, cancer, arthritis, dementias, mood disorders, allergic disorder autoimmune disorders.
4) Even in doses as high as 18 grams in sick people (cancer patients) it improved survival and was very well tolerated.
5) It may make people smarter and give them better memories even if they are not having problems in those areas.
6) It helps the stress response.
7) It keeps the biologic time clocks, the telomeres, longer in sick people and most likely in regular people as well.
8) Aquaculture is already on the way to solving the renewable resource issue. My suggestion: grind up krill and add it to the fish meal.
9) Fish oil can be purified to parts per trillion.
10) It is the single most studied, most effective supplement ever and has been even shown to decrease body fat, improve lipids and insulin responses.
If I were to give an 11th element it would be that we are as a nation severely deficient in it and fixing that problem alone would probably save several million lives, reduce crime, depression, increase productivity and put us more firmly on the road to economic recovery and liberty and justice for all.
Oh and by the way, Mr. Obama, the best fish oil in the world lives here: Fish Oil - Super Omega 3
1) It does what no prescription drug can ever do.
2) It’s all natural and comparatively almost side effects free even in big does.
3) It reduces death and infirmity from several major causes of aging and death in this country including heart disease, cancer, arthritis, dementias, mood disorders, allergic disorder autoimmune disorders.
4) Even in doses as high as 18 grams in sick people (cancer patients) it improved survival and was very well tolerated.
5) It may make people smarter and give them better memories even if they are not having problems in those areas.
6) It helps the stress response.
7) It keeps the biologic time clocks, the telomeres, longer in sick people and most likely in regular people as well.
8) Aquaculture is already on the way to solving the renewable resource issue. My suggestion: grind up krill and add it to the fish meal.
9) Fish oil can be purified to parts per trillion.
10) It is the single most studied, most effective supplement ever and has been even shown to decrease body fat, improve lipids and insulin responses.
If I were to give an 11th element it would be that we are as a nation severely deficient in it and fixing that problem alone would probably save several million lives, reduce crime, depression, increase productivity and put us more firmly on the road to economic recovery and liberty and justice for all.
Oh and by the way, Mr. Obama, the best fish oil in the world lives here: Fish Oil - Super Omega 3
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Vitamin D fails in major study
The Women’s Health Initiative is a huge long-running study that has contributed a lot of useful information to the world of medicine and prevention.
Over 15,000 women were analyzed after taking Vitamin D and Calcium supplements.
A modest reduction in hip fracture was seen, suggesting that this routine has some benefit in preventing osteoporosis or softening of the bones that happens with aging and hormone deficiency. Osteoporosis remains one of the major causes of death, disability and comes at a huge cost to the health care system.
The study also looked at colon cancer and found no benefit to Vitamin D in preventing colon cancer at all.
These findings represent the results of one of the first large scale trials of Vitamin D and Calcium for the prevention of bone loss and cancer.
Dr Dave comments:
1) The study used 400IU of D3 and 1 gram of the Calcium carbonate, the worst choice for calcium supplementation.
We have seen this before. If you want to prove something does not work, make sure you use inadequate doses, the wrong supplement and use it for a time frame that may not show benefit.
2) The study does reflect the behavior of women at large, however, since many women do take this level of D in a multi and have trouble taking more pills or higher doses. But this does not mean the supplements don’t work
3) The colon cancer controversy is interesting and this was a big study but once again I think the dosages of D need to be in the 2000 to 5000 IU range to show benefit. Everyone is concerned about D toxicity but I think this is also much ado about nothing since it is extremely rare and D deficiency is far more common.
4) Also lacking in the study were actual measured levels of D in the bloodstream. This would have been expensive but much more useful in terms of determining the right level of D and the same for calcium. At least pick a supplement that is well absorbed.
5) Notice no one said anything about Vitamin A causing cancer in this huge study either!!!!
Overall I find the study to be of limited value because it tells us what we already know. If you use low doses of the wrong supplements you will not get much return!
Source: WHI initiative published report
Over 15,000 women were analyzed after taking Vitamin D and Calcium supplements.
A modest reduction in hip fracture was seen, suggesting that this routine has some benefit in preventing osteoporosis or softening of the bones that happens with aging and hormone deficiency. Osteoporosis remains one of the major causes of death, disability and comes at a huge cost to the health care system.
The study also looked at colon cancer and found no benefit to Vitamin D in preventing colon cancer at all.
These findings represent the results of one of the first large scale trials of Vitamin D and Calcium for the prevention of bone loss and cancer.
Dr Dave comments:
1) The study used 400IU of D3 and 1 gram of the Calcium carbonate, the worst choice for calcium supplementation.
We have seen this before. If you want to prove something does not work, make sure you use inadequate doses, the wrong supplement and use it for a time frame that may not show benefit.
2) The study does reflect the behavior of women at large, however, since many women do take this level of D in a multi and have trouble taking more pills or higher doses. But this does not mean the supplements don’t work
3) The colon cancer controversy is interesting and this was a big study but once again I think the dosages of D need to be in the 2000 to 5000 IU range to show benefit. Everyone is concerned about D toxicity but I think this is also much ado about nothing since it is extremely rare and D deficiency is far more common.
4) Also lacking in the study were actual measured levels of D in the bloodstream. This would have been expensive but much more useful in terms of determining the right level of D and the same for calcium. At least pick a supplement that is well absorbed.
5) Notice no one said anything about Vitamin A causing cancer in this huge study either!!!!
Overall I find the study to be of limited value because it tells us what we already know. If you use low doses of the wrong supplements you will not get much return!
Source: WHI initiative published report
Friday, March 26, 2010
It’s On!
I thought you might like to see the schedule for Fitcamp which is less than one month away now (April 14-18 Fitcamp.com).
We do have an addition as well (which is not shown here) and that is we have an Active Isolated Stretching Expert coming down as well. AIS is not only the hottest thing in stretching, it is probably one of the few ways you can rapidly, efficiently develop flexibility for sports. Those of you who do a lot of Yoga will be amazed at how much your posture improves using this technique and how fast it improves as well.
I am primarily interested in it to fix my lousy biomechanics for running LOL so there are many applications.
As you can see I have a few cameos as well and I am proud to be along side such an erudite group!
There is still time and a few rooms left if you realize as we do that this is a totally new animal and something that has not been done before.
Dr Dave
FITCAMP Cancun
Tentative Schedule
Tues. April 13
Early Registration All Day
5PM Early Birds Power Walk Workout on Beach
6PM Team Leaders Meeting
Wed. April 14
Registration All Day
7:30AM Meditation
8AM Yoga (all levels)
9AM Breakfast
10AM Power Walk (option)
Hell Hike (option)
11:30 Butts N Guts or Pool Workout
12:00 – 1:00 Lunch
**1:00 – 5PM FULCRUM
6:00 “The Details on D” (Vitamin D Seminar with Dr. Joe Mercola)
7:00-8:00 Dinner
8:00 Telomere Talk with Bill Andrews, PhD
**9:00 Team Building Before Bedtime with Fulcrum Learning Systems
Thursday April 15
7:15 Meditation
HellHike (option)
8:00 Yoga (Level 1-2 on Pier) (Level 2-3 White Lotus Yoga with Fran)
Yoga for Stiffies with Greta B
9:00 Breakfast
**10:00 Teamwork and Motivation with Fulcrum Learning Systems
12:00 Sprint 8 Theory & Workout (option)
1:15 Lunch
3:00 Anti-Aging Strategies with Dr. Dave
4:00 Sunset Yoga
Sprint 8 (option)
Beach /Pool (option)
5:00-5:30 Butts N Guts (option)
Beach/Pool (option)
6:00 Dinner
7:30 Ask The Experts Seminar (Dr. Dave, Greta B, Dr. Mercola, Bill A, Phil C)
Friday, April 16
7:15 Meditation
Hell Hike (option)
8:00 Yoga (all levels options)
9:00 Breakfast
10:00 UltraRunning with Bill A Seminar, plus Phil C Training Tips
Fun Run w/Dr. Dave or Power Walk w/GB (option)
11:00 Sprint 8
11:30 Pool Workout or Butts N Guts
12:30-1:30 Lunch
1:30 Hormones 101 (for men and women) with Dr. Dave
2:00 TBA
3PM Sprint 8 (option)
Beach/Pool (option)
4:00 Sprint 8 (option)
Beach/Pool (option)
5:30 Dream Team Seminar
7:00 Dinner
8:00 Seminar TBA
Sat April 17
7:15 Meditation
Hell Hike (option)
8:00 Yoga (all levels)
9:00 Breakfast
10:00 Fat-Burning Secrets Seminar
11:00 Sprint 8
11:30 Pool Workout
12:00 Lunch
1:00 Diagnostics: What Tests You Should Get and Why/Dr. Dave
2:00-5:00 Tour options/Hotel bikes or kayak rentals
6:00 Sprint 8 (option)
Workout option TBA
7:00 Dinner
8:00 Talent Show/Awards/Dream Team
Sun April 18
7:15 Meditation
Hell Hike (option)
8:00 Yoga (all levels)
9:00 Breakfast
10:00 Taking It Home With You (seminar)
11:00 Sprint 8 ; options/TBA)
Departures throughout the day
We do have an addition as well (which is not shown here) and that is we have an Active Isolated Stretching Expert coming down as well. AIS is not only the hottest thing in stretching, it is probably one of the few ways you can rapidly, efficiently develop flexibility for sports. Those of you who do a lot of Yoga will be amazed at how much your posture improves using this technique and how fast it improves as well.
I am primarily interested in it to fix my lousy biomechanics for running LOL so there are many applications.
As you can see I have a few cameos as well and I am proud to be along side such an erudite group!
There is still time and a few rooms left if you realize as we do that this is a totally new animal and something that has not been done before.
Dr Dave
FITCAMP Cancun
Tentative Schedule
Tues. April 13
Early Registration All Day
5PM Early Birds Power Walk Workout on Beach
6PM Team Leaders Meeting
Wed. April 14
Registration All Day
7:30AM Meditation
8AM Yoga (all levels)
9AM Breakfast
10AM Power Walk (option)
Hell Hike (option)
11:30 Butts N Guts or Pool Workout
12:00 – 1:00 Lunch
**1:00 – 5PM FULCRUM
6:00 “The Details on D” (Vitamin D Seminar with Dr. Joe Mercola)
7:00-8:00 Dinner
8:00 Telomere Talk with Bill Andrews, PhD
**9:00 Team Building Before Bedtime with Fulcrum Learning Systems
Thursday April 15
7:15 Meditation
HellHike (option)
8:00 Yoga (Level 1-2 on Pier) (Level 2-3 White Lotus Yoga with Fran)
Yoga for Stiffies with Greta B
9:00 Breakfast
**10:00 Teamwork and Motivation with Fulcrum Learning Systems
12:00 Sprint 8 Theory & Workout (option)
1:15 Lunch
3:00 Anti-Aging Strategies with Dr. Dave
4:00 Sunset Yoga
Sprint 8 (option)
Beach /Pool (option)
5:00-5:30 Butts N Guts (option)
Beach/Pool (option)
6:00 Dinner
7:30 Ask The Experts Seminar (Dr. Dave, Greta B, Dr. Mercola, Bill A, Phil C)
Friday, April 16
7:15 Meditation
Hell Hike (option)
8:00 Yoga (all levels options)
9:00 Breakfast
10:00 UltraRunning with Bill A Seminar, plus Phil C Training Tips
Fun Run w/Dr. Dave or Power Walk w/GB (option)
11:00 Sprint 8
11:30 Pool Workout or Butts N Guts
12:30-1:30 Lunch
1:30 Hormones 101 (for men and women) with Dr. Dave
2:00 TBA
3PM Sprint 8 (option)
Beach/Pool (option)
4:00 Sprint 8 (option)
Beach/Pool (option)
5:30 Dream Team Seminar
7:00 Dinner
8:00 Seminar TBA
Sat April 17
7:15 Meditation
Hell Hike (option)
8:00 Yoga (all levels)
9:00 Breakfast
10:00 Fat-Burning Secrets Seminar
11:00 Sprint 8
11:30 Pool Workout
12:00 Lunch
1:00 Diagnostics: What Tests You Should Get and Why/Dr. Dave
2:00-5:00 Tour options/Hotel bikes or kayak rentals
6:00 Sprint 8 (option)
Workout option TBA
7:00 Dinner
8:00 Talent Show/Awards/Dream Team
Sun April 18
7:15 Meditation
Hell Hike (option)
8:00 Yoga (all levels)
9:00 Breakfast
10:00 Taking It Home With You (seminar)
11:00 Sprint 8 ; options/TBA)
Departures throughout the day
Monday, March 22, 2010
What they won’t tell you about Vitamin D
Vitamin D continues to be all the rage and, as a result of my blog, I have gotten some questions. One question that has come up is the role of Vitamin A in interfering with Vitamin D metabolism. One person went so far as to suggest that Vitamin A causes cancer because it defeats the cancer fighting properties of Vitamin D.
I will address that in a bit but based on the response to my last blog on D “Dr Dave Does ‘D’” there are a few more things that people want to know.
First question was, “How does vitamin D interfere with cancer formation?”
Answer: Vitamin D has a lot in common with fish oil. Both have anti-inflammatory properties that ultimately are helpful and both are nutrigenomic compounds meaning that they influence the transcription of genes.
While it is known that most vitamins are cofactors for reactions in the body and needed for these reactions, it is my hypothesis that all the major vitamins (including E, A, C, K, etc.) are actually involved in gene expression.
This is undoubtedly one of the roles of Vitamin D.
In numerous other writings I have stressed the preservational effects of Vitamin D on the all important “biologic time clocks”, the telomeres.
Longer telomeres also prevent cancer.
So we know of at least three ways that we can prevent cancer with Vitamin D either directly or indirectly: anti inflammatory properties, genetic transcription, alteration and telomere length preservation.
Vitamin D’s effects on two of these three pathways are best demonstrated by its role in infection. It’s probably no coincidence that winter (when sun exposure is down) leads to more infections. It’s not just that there are more infections around because most of these things--including influenza--are there year round at least in some numbers.
It is the immune status of the individual that makes the susceptibility.
But Vitamin D both enhances and decreases some genes associated with inflammation and infection response, creating a “perfect storm” of natural response.
The same for fish oil, although here is what happens on the internet: Some whiz kid who is not a doc or a scientist decides that fish oil is anti-inflammatory so it must be potentially dangerous in the influenza outbreak. For the very same reasons I mentioned with Vitamin D, fish oil, which contains no vitamin A and very little D by the way, enhances the body’s responses.
This is what happens when people do not dig deep enough into statements made, and it’s how rumors and urban legends get started.
Now onto Vitamin D and Vitamin A.
Both have immune function signals through the same pathways and indeed do have some competitive actions. Both have been shown to improve the response to infections independent of each other although the target populations differ.
There is one and only one study that suggests this may have consequences in something called adenomatous polyps of the colon.
Adenomatous polyps, if left untreated, can eventually turn into colon cancer but the rate of simple adenomas is the lowest of all of the adenomas, so it makes a difference what kind of adenoma (for instance villous adenomas transform to cancer in one quarter of cases). Lots of things figure into the transformation size, type and location but it is safe to say that complete eradication of adenomatous polyps would indeed get rid of almost all colon cancer, which is why I personally had a colonoscopy.
Through all this, please understand I am the last person on the planet who wants either of us, you or me, to have cancer of the colon!
But I do want you to see how “facts” are not always accurate and why.
No mention of the type of polyps was seen in this study.
Worse yet, the Vitamin A and Vitamin D intakes were based on a “food questionnaire”, not measured values. Any scientist will tell you questionnaire based studies are the most notoriously flawed of ANY kind of study and right there, any real accuracy has to be questioned in regards to the conclusions reached.
The authors of the study also used the exact phrases “weak association” for the benefits of Vitamin D and adenomas.
Here is a quote from the extract which is public domain:
Please note the use of the words “extreme” and “may”, both of which are qualifiers.
OK, so now you have one study done by questionnaire that does not come out and say Vitamin A causes cancer but here is an example of what one of “my
people” wrote in:
“Basically, the site reported that Vitamin A conflicts with uptake of Vitamin D, causing untold higher incidence of cancer, which Vitamin D helps to prevent. Further, it said that cod liver oil, a traditional source of Vitamin A, should not be used any more.”
I do not know exactly who wrote this information or which web site it came from but I am familiar enough with internet marketing to know how it works. Also I do not really know if the people on this web site used the words “untold higher incidence of cancer” but if they did it is extremely hyperbolic and premature and is not something anyone who is a scientist would say.
If I had to guess, I smell the hand of a copywriter or team of same.
I could be wrong but I think not.
I will tell you this much: I write every word of what you read in my emails and my blogs and any other communication I have with you. That does not mean that people who use teams of writers are wrong or bad, I am simply telling you it's different and ultimately you must be the judge of what you hear and believe.
At any rate, no other study has ever said anything about Vitamin A and cancer and the cited study is so full of holes, I suspect that is one reason no one has tried to repeat it.
Simply put, this is my position: any assertion that Vitamin A increases cancer needs far more work to be proven to my satisfaction.
I do think Vitamin D is preventative.
In addition there are two other very important general conclusions I do agree with.
First, Vitamin D is under tested, under recognized and clearly an epidemic nutritional deficiency. It is absolutely important that we use 25 OH vitamin D levels to look at Vitamin D status and we can do a huge amount of good for the world by getting everyone’s 25 OH Vitamin D levels above 50. Mine was at 83 last time I checked and it’s certainly no lower now!
Second, I agree with the general recommendation that cod is an inferior way to get Omega 3’s. I have always said that and continue to maintain that stance. As I have also always said, I personally believe that fish oil is the way to get your Omega 3’s. It’s the most studied and it’s the way our ancestors got it and all the populations based studies and benefits of Omega 3’s have been studies using fish or fish oil, not any other source including those that show improvements in colon cancer rates!
The bottom line is most of us could use more Vitamin D!!!!
In defense of the myth of cod liver oil being healthy, however, I will say that back in the day (1930’s) cod did have much higher ratios of Vitamin D to Vitamin A than now and I think that ultimately will be where the true “healthy” approach lands.
Cod consumption, as the studies show, is also a great way to get arsenic and mercury poisoning!
J Toxicol Environ Health A. 2007 Nov;70(22):1897-911.
Heavy metals in Pacific cod (Gadus macrocephalus) from the Aleutians: location, age, size, and risk.
Burger J, Gochfeld M, Shukla T, Jeitner C, Burke S, Donio M, Shukla S, Snigaroff R, Snigaroff D, Stamm T, Volz C.
Division of Life Sciences, Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute, Rutgers University, Piscataway, New Jersey 08854-8082, USA. burger@biology.rutgers.edu
If a subsistence fisher from one of the Aleut villages ate one meal of cod per week for As, or one meal per day for Hg, they would exceed the U.S. EPA reference dose for As and Hg.
Finally, I want to remind you that a very famous study showed that multi vitamins, which typically contain Vitamin E and C, 10,000IU of Vitamin A and 200 to 400 IU of D improved telomere length by 5%.
Here is an abstract quote: Compared with non-users, the relative telomere length of leukocyte DNA was on average 5.1% longer among daily multivitamin users (P for trend = 0.002).
Am J Clin Nutr. 2009 Jun;89(6):1857-63. Epub 2009 Mar 11.
Multivitamin use and telomere length in women.
Xu Q, Parks CG, DeRoo LA, Cawthon RM, Sandler DP, Chen H.
Epidemiology Branch, National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA.
As a final reminder our Fitcamp Cancun is coming up and holistic icon, medical pioneer and marketing genius, Dr Joe Mercola, has the expert lecture on Vitamin D so you can come and ask him about this and other related topics yourself!!!
I will address that in a bit but based on the response to my last blog on D “Dr Dave Does ‘D’” there are a few more things that people want to know.
First question was, “How does vitamin D interfere with cancer formation?”
Answer: Vitamin D has a lot in common with fish oil. Both have anti-inflammatory properties that ultimately are helpful and both are nutrigenomic compounds meaning that they influence the transcription of genes.
While it is known that most vitamins are cofactors for reactions in the body and needed for these reactions, it is my hypothesis that all the major vitamins (including E, A, C, K, etc.) are actually involved in gene expression.
This is undoubtedly one of the roles of Vitamin D.
In numerous other writings I have stressed the preservational effects of Vitamin D on the all important “biologic time clocks”, the telomeres.
Longer telomeres also prevent cancer.
So we know of at least three ways that we can prevent cancer with Vitamin D either directly or indirectly: anti inflammatory properties, genetic transcription, alteration and telomere length preservation.
Vitamin D’s effects on two of these three pathways are best demonstrated by its role in infection. It’s probably no coincidence that winter (when sun exposure is down) leads to more infections. It’s not just that there are more infections around because most of these things--including influenza--are there year round at least in some numbers.
It is the immune status of the individual that makes the susceptibility.
But Vitamin D both enhances and decreases some genes associated with inflammation and infection response, creating a “perfect storm” of natural response.
The same for fish oil, although here is what happens on the internet: Some whiz kid who is not a doc or a scientist decides that fish oil is anti-inflammatory so it must be potentially dangerous in the influenza outbreak. For the very same reasons I mentioned with Vitamin D, fish oil, which contains no vitamin A and very little D by the way, enhances the body’s responses.
This is what happens when people do not dig deep enough into statements made, and it’s how rumors and urban legends get started.
Now onto Vitamin D and Vitamin A.
Both have immune function signals through the same pathways and indeed do have some competitive actions. Both have been shown to improve the response to infections independent of each other although the target populations differ.
There is one and only one study that suggests this may have consequences in something called adenomatous polyps of the colon.
Adenomatous polyps, if left untreated, can eventually turn into colon cancer but the rate of simple adenomas is the lowest of all of the adenomas, so it makes a difference what kind of adenoma (for instance villous adenomas transform to cancer in one quarter of cases). Lots of things figure into the transformation size, type and location but it is safe to say that complete eradication of adenomatous polyps would indeed get rid of almost all colon cancer, which is why I personally had a colonoscopy.
Through all this, please understand I am the last person on the planet who wants either of us, you or me, to have cancer of the colon!
But I do want you to see how “facts” are not always accurate and why.
No mention of the type of polyps was seen in this study.
Worse yet, the Vitamin A and Vitamin D intakes were based on a “food questionnaire”, not measured values. Any scientist will tell you questionnaire based studies are the most notoriously flawed of ANY kind of study and right there, any real accuracy has to be questioned in regards to the conclusions reached.
The authors of the study also used the exact phrases “weak association” for the benefits of Vitamin D and adenomas.
Here is a quote from the extract which is public domain:
“Total Vitamin D intake was weakly associated with reduced risk of distal colorectal adenoma. The combinations of high vitamin D and low retinol intake (RR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.28, 1.10) further decreased risk of distal colorectal adenoma when compared with the opposite extreme. Higher total calcium and vitamin D intakes were associated with reduced risk, and the actions of vitamin D may be attenuated by high retinol intake.”
Please note the use of the words “extreme” and “may”, both of which are qualifiers.
OK, so now you have one study done by questionnaire that does not come out and say Vitamin A causes cancer but here is an example of what one of “my
people” wrote in:
“Basically, the site reported that Vitamin A conflicts with uptake of Vitamin D, causing untold higher incidence of cancer, which Vitamin D helps to prevent. Further, it said that cod liver oil, a traditional source of Vitamin A, should not be used any more.”
I do not know exactly who wrote this information or which web site it came from but I am familiar enough with internet marketing to know how it works. Also I do not really know if the people on this web site used the words “untold higher incidence of cancer” but if they did it is extremely hyperbolic and premature and is not something anyone who is a scientist would say.
If I had to guess, I smell the hand of a copywriter or team of same.
I could be wrong but I think not.
I will tell you this much: I write every word of what you read in my emails and my blogs and any other communication I have with you. That does not mean that people who use teams of writers are wrong or bad, I am simply telling you it's different and ultimately you must be the judge of what you hear and believe.
At any rate, no other study has ever said anything about Vitamin A and cancer and the cited study is so full of holes, I suspect that is one reason no one has tried to repeat it.
Simply put, this is my position: any assertion that Vitamin A increases cancer needs far more work to be proven to my satisfaction.
I do think Vitamin D is preventative.
In addition there are two other very important general conclusions I do agree with.
First, Vitamin D is under tested, under recognized and clearly an epidemic nutritional deficiency. It is absolutely important that we use 25 OH vitamin D levels to look at Vitamin D status and we can do a huge amount of good for the world by getting everyone’s 25 OH Vitamin D levels above 50. Mine was at 83 last time I checked and it’s certainly no lower now!
Second, I agree with the general recommendation that cod is an inferior way to get Omega 3’s. I have always said that and continue to maintain that stance. As I have also always said, I personally believe that fish oil is the way to get your Omega 3’s. It’s the most studied and it’s the way our ancestors got it and all the populations based studies and benefits of Omega 3’s have been studies using fish or fish oil, not any other source including those that show improvements in colon cancer rates!
The bottom line is most of us could use more Vitamin D!!!!
In defense of the myth of cod liver oil being healthy, however, I will say that back in the day (1930’s) cod did have much higher ratios of Vitamin D to Vitamin A than now and I think that ultimately will be where the true “healthy” approach lands.
Cod consumption, as the studies show, is also a great way to get arsenic and mercury poisoning!
J Toxicol Environ Health A. 2007 Nov;70(22):1897-911.
Heavy metals in Pacific cod (Gadus macrocephalus) from the Aleutians: location, age, size, and risk.
Burger J, Gochfeld M, Shukla T, Jeitner C, Burke S, Donio M, Shukla S, Snigaroff R, Snigaroff D, Stamm T, Volz C.
Division of Life Sciences, Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute, Rutgers University, Piscataway, New Jersey 08854-8082, USA. burger@biology.rutgers.edu
If a subsistence fisher from one of the Aleut villages ate one meal of cod per week for As, or one meal per day for Hg, they would exceed the U.S. EPA reference dose for As and Hg.
Finally, I want to remind you that a very famous study showed that multi vitamins, which typically contain Vitamin E and C, 10,000IU of Vitamin A and 200 to 400 IU of D improved telomere length by 5%.
Here is an abstract quote: Compared with non-users, the relative telomere length of leukocyte DNA was on average 5.1% longer among daily multivitamin users (P for trend = 0.002).
Am J Clin Nutr. 2009 Jun;89(6):1857-63. Epub 2009 Mar 11.
Multivitamin use and telomere length in women.
Xu Q, Parks CG, DeRoo LA, Cawthon RM, Sandler DP, Chen H.
Epidemiology Branch, National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA.
As a final reminder our Fitcamp Cancun is coming up and holistic icon, medical pioneer and marketing genius, Dr Joe Mercola, has the expert lecture on Vitamin D so you can come and ask him about this and other related topics yourself!!!
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Dr Dave Does ‘D’
Rather than my usual scholarly diatribe (LOL) I have decided to attack this one in a most frequently asked Q and A format, so here we go!
1) What is the big fuss about Vitamin D and why all of a sudden?
Answer: It’s a question of hard science and hard marketing. The science of Vitamin D was truly “lost” for a long time although in the Wayback Machine you might have found more on it. Vitamin D is actually a steroid hormone and as such is involved in so many critical issues of human health including: cancer, heart disease, diabetes, high blood pressure, chronic fatigue, fibromyalgia, osteoporosis, auto immune diseases like lupus, M.S., depression and thyroid illness to name a few!
The role of Vitamin D in these illnesses has become apparent as the levels of Vitamin D that seem to improve and in some cases “cure those maladies” is found to be way higher than most people currently have in their blood stream.
To many times it appears as if we are in the midst of a “Low Vitamin D” epidemic.
As far as the marketing goes, the internet rules these days and careers are made and broken on whether or not people are looking at you and Vitamin D is certainly “the hot topic”. Someone will no doubt become famous or more famous using it as a stepping stone into the public consciousness.
2) Why are we all so low in Vitamin D?
Answer: It’s a combination of medical ignorance, lifestyle and environment. The levels of Vitamin D needed to improve disease is far above the levels needed to prevent Ricketts (which is where the “normal” levels come from) so for a long time lots of doctors told lots of people they had “normal” Vitamin D levels even though they were well below the levels we now recommend to give us the best chance at health.
Such teachings like “naked at noon for 15 minutes” were not only impractical but wrong.
The amount of sunlight needed to generate enough Vitamin D to give you the kind of higher levels we are talking about these days is several hours a day and unless you belong to a nudist colony you are not getting that much from the sun. In addition that level of UV radiation poses a serious risk of skin cancer to at least some of us!
3) How do I know if my doctor knows enough about Vitamin D?
Answer: A simple question to ask is, “Doc, what is the test for Vitamin D called that diagnoses a D deficiency in my blood?”
He or she should say, “25 hydroxy Vitamin D level.” If the answer comes back 1-25 level and there is no mention of the 25 level, your doc needs to go back to the books.
The classic 1-25 hydroxy Vitamin D level that was taught in medical school for so long is a poor test because it represents a short lived type of Vitamin D and not the “total Vitamin D” in the body. Also the parathyroid gland tries to make up for low D levels by increasing the conversion of 25 to 1-25 Vitamin D, which leads to a “false normal” 1-25 level. This level is going up but the real usable source of Vitamin D in your body is dropping.
4) If I supplement with Vitamin D, how much should I take?
Answer: That varies but most docs recommend between 2,000 and 5,000 IU on a pretty much daily basis. No matter what, you should have your 25-hydroxy Vitamin D levels checked along with your calcium if you are supplementing because Vitamin D is toxic if you get too much.
Personally, in all my years of practice, I have not seen a single case of Vitamin D toxicity even in people on big doses.
5) What about foods and vitamins that contain Vitamin D?
Answer: Most foods have D levels in the low 100’s, even foods that are supposedly rich in D. Example: Salmon has 350 IU fortified mil 100 IU and most people need thousands of units even if they get some sun.
6) Are there “special risk” populations that should really have their D levels checked and monitored?
Answer: As an anti-aging doc I think everyone should. But there are some medications that can lower D levels and anyone with a history of prostate, breast, or colon cancer, diabetes, heart disease or high blood pressure (to name the most common illnesses in our society) should be checked. Also since the conversion of Vitamin D goes down with age, older people need to be checked and because vitamin D comes from cholesterol, anyone who has aggressive lipid lowering therapy with a statin drug should be followed.
Finally, anyone who has had gastric bypass is at risk for low D levels.
*None of my lists are meant to be exhaustive, they are meant to show you how central to your health Vitamin D is.
7) I heard from research that Vitamin A is bad for Vitamin D and it might cause cancer!
Answer: You’ll have to wait for my next blog for that one but for the moment just be careful what you label as research. It’s easy to mention studies and to interpret them out of context or to do a ‘true but unrelated’ sequence and make it sound authoritarian.
That’s it for now and I hope you will help enlighten your friendly neighborhood medical professional on this topic!
One final note on this; those of you who are coming to Fitcamp Cancun can hear holistic medical guru Joe Mercola DO and Bill Andrews PhD as they add their considerable expertise to our camp faculty.
Dr Joe is presenting on none other than Vitamin D!!!
Bill Andrews will be talking about--what else--telomeres.
1) What is the big fuss about Vitamin D and why all of a sudden?
Answer: It’s a question of hard science and hard marketing. The science of Vitamin D was truly “lost” for a long time although in the Wayback Machine you might have found more on it. Vitamin D is actually a steroid hormone and as such is involved in so many critical issues of human health including: cancer, heart disease, diabetes, high blood pressure, chronic fatigue, fibromyalgia, osteoporosis, auto immune diseases like lupus, M.S., depression and thyroid illness to name a few!
The role of Vitamin D in these illnesses has become apparent as the levels of Vitamin D that seem to improve and in some cases “cure those maladies” is found to be way higher than most people currently have in their blood stream.
To many times it appears as if we are in the midst of a “Low Vitamin D” epidemic.
As far as the marketing goes, the internet rules these days and careers are made and broken on whether or not people are looking at you and Vitamin D is certainly “the hot topic”. Someone will no doubt become famous or more famous using it as a stepping stone into the public consciousness.
2) Why are we all so low in Vitamin D?
Answer: It’s a combination of medical ignorance, lifestyle and environment. The levels of Vitamin D needed to improve disease is far above the levels needed to prevent Ricketts (which is where the “normal” levels come from) so for a long time lots of doctors told lots of people they had “normal” Vitamin D levels even though they were well below the levels we now recommend to give us the best chance at health.
Such teachings like “naked at noon for 15 minutes” were not only impractical but wrong.
The amount of sunlight needed to generate enough Vitamin D to give you the kind of higher levels we are talking about these days is several hours a day and unless you belong to a nudist colony you are not getting that much from the sun. In addition that level of UV radiation poses a serious risk of skin cancer to at least some of us!
3) How do I know if my doctor knows enough about Vitamin D?
Answer: A simple question to ask is, “Doc, what is the test for Vitamin D called that diagnoses a D deficiency in my blood?”
He or she should say, “25 hydroxy Vitamin D level.” If the answer comes back 1-25 level and there is no mention of the 25 level, your doc needs to go back to the books.
The classic 1-25 hydroxy Vitamin D level that was taught in medical school for so long is a poor test because it represents a short lived type of Vitamin D and not the “total Vitamin D” in the body. Also the parathyroid gland tries to make up for low D levels by increasing the conversion of 25 to 1-25 Vitamin D, which leads to a “false normal” 1-25 level. This level is going up but the real usable source of Vitamin D in your body is dropping.
4) If I supplement with Vitamin D, how much should I take?
Answer: That varies but most docs recommend between 2,000 and 5,000 IU on a pretty much daily basis. No matter what, you should have your 25-hydroxy Vitamin D levels checked along with your calcium if you are supplementing because Vitamin D is toxic if you get too much.
Personally, in all my years of practice, I have not seen a single case of Vitamin D toxicity even in people on big doses.
5) What about foods and vitamins that contain Vitamin D?
Answer: Most foods have D levels in the low 100’s, even foods that are supposedly rich in D. Example: Salmon has 350 IU fortified mil 100 IU and most people need thousands of units even if they get some sun.
6) Are there “special risk” populations that should really have their D levels checked and monitored?
Answer: As an anti-aging doc I think everyone should. But there are some medications that can lower D levels and anyone with a history of prostate, breast, or colon cancer, diabetes, heart disease or high blood pressure (to name the most common illnesses in our society) should be checked. Also since the conversion of Vitamin D goes down with age, older people need to be checked and because vitamin D comes from cholesterol, anyone who has aggressive lipid lowering therapy with a statin drug should be followed.
Finally, anyone who has had gastric bypass is at risk for low D levels.
*None of my lists are meant to be exhaustive, they are meant to show you how central to your health Vitamin D is.
7) I heard from research that Vitamin A is bad for Vitamin D and it might cause cancer!
Answer: You’ll have to wait for my next blog for that one but for the moment just be careful what you label as research. It’s easy to mention studies and to interpret them out of context or to do a ‘true but unrelated’ sequence and make it sound authoritarian.
That’s it for now and I hope you will help enlighten your friendly neighborhood medical professional on this topic!
One final note on this; those of you who are coming to Fitcamp Cancun can hear holistic medical guru Joe Mercola DO and Bill Andrews PhD as they add their considerable expertise to our camp faculty.
Dr Joe is presenting on none other than Vitamin D!!!
Bill Andrews will be talking about--what else--telomeres.
Monday, March 15, 2010
Ancient genes current diets
There is a movement in our society that attracts a fair number of people.
It is the ultimate “eat for your genes” diet and while purists will argue the terminology “raw food diet” or Paleolithic diet seem to be the most common terms for it.
The premise of the diet goes like this:
1) Almost all of our genes for handling nutrition are stuck in an evolutionary pattern that ended somewhere between 50,000 and 100,000 years ago. To be sure evolution continues as there have been changes in other genes of ours but the “food genes” haven’t changed.
2) If the food genes haven’t change then the best diet for us must be one that closely mimics that of our ancestors from that time period. The closest diet existant on the earth to that diet would be that of the hunter gatherer tribes of East Africa.
3) As humanity moved out of Africa, food sources changed, dietary habits changed and a number of complex diseases we now know to be nutritional in large part arose. These included cancer, diabetes, heart disease, obesity and so on. Most if not all of these illnesses have, at the root of their causes, inflammation.
4) In addition there is some reasoning that the current diet we eat “acidifies” our systems in an unhealthful way, also contributing to the pathology and inflammatory response in our bodies.
5) The main differences in dietary composition between our ancient ancestors and “us” is as follows:
a) Our ancestors ate much more and consumed about the same amount of calories. The nutritional density of minerals and vitamins was higher but the actual caloric content was lower. Think of an organic apple versus a Twinkie!
b) They ate less carbs, no refined carbs, no significant grains or milk products, had no added sugar where as we add sugar to everything, eat mutated modified grains and milk.
c) Their glycemic load was far less and they ate 2x the amount of vegetables (not 2x the amount of fruit) as we do. Their overall plant to animal consumption ratio was probably 50/50.
d) They had greater systemic antioxidant capacity, drank more free water, ate more soluble fiber, more protein, more fat though most of it came from fish and shell fish as well as free range animal fat (let’s face it, the African plains are the ultimate free range!) ate more cholesterol, much more potassium, much less sodium.
e) Their net bodily acid production was much lower and they actually were more “alkaline” in terms of what they produced although their body ph and blood chemistries were the same, because of the acid load we make, we have to work harder to maintain them. Please remember it's food that acidifies or alkalinizes your body and you will not ever see this as a change in your body's ph. You may see it in the urine but the best way to measure it is a fairly complex thing called Net Endogenous Acid Production. This is a urinary test and can be roughly approximated by measuring urine Ph.
f) A huge difference and one that most likely represents the difference in the inflammatory states of our ancestors versus us with a chronic inflammatory tendency is the Omega 6 (inflammatory) to Omega 3 ratio. It is approximated to have been anywhere from 1:1 to 4:1 in our Paleolithic ancestors. This is one of the main reasons I advocate large doses of fish oil supplementation; to rebalance that ratio.
There are of course some holes in the Paleolithic argument as people wax nostalgic about the secrets of our elders and ancestors, etc., etc. No one really knows how long such a diet will help you live because the people that practice something close to it now live in an area where short life spans and hardships are the norm. So it was with our ancestors. If a big enough population of Westerners begin to adopt those practices we may in time see a significant difference in their health versus the general population, but that is not a scientific observation.
Yet.
In the meantime my own practices (see 5 easy pieces article) have begun to tend towards a raw food diet for reasons that are closer to the hearts and minds of most of us.
It is a great diet to eat to stay lean!
Best,
Doc
It is the ultimate “eat for your genes” diet and while purists will argue the terminology “raw food diet” or Paleolithic diet seem to be the most common terms for it.
The premise of the diet goes like this:
1) Almost all of our genes for handling nutrition are stuck in an evolutionary pattern that ended somewhere between 50,000 and 100,000 years ago. To be sure evolution continues as there have been changes in other genes of ours but the “food genes” haven’t changed.
2) If the food genes haven’t change then the best diet for us must be one that closely mimics that of our ancestors from that time period. The closest diet existant on the earth to that diet would be that of the hunter gatherer tribes of East Africa.
3) As humanity moved out of Africa, food sources changed, dietary habits changed and a number of complex diseases we now know to be nutritional in large part arose. These included cancer, diabetes, heart disease, obesity and so on. Most if not all of these illnesses have, at the root of their causes, inflammation.
4) In addition there is some reasoning that the current diet we eat “acidifies” our systems in an unhealthful way, also contributing to the pathology and inflammatory response in our bodies.
5) The main differences in dietary composition between our ancient ancestors and “us” is as follows:
a) Our ancestors ate much more and consumed about the same amount of calories. The nutritional density of minerals and vitamins was higher but the actual caloric content was lower. Think of an organic apple versus a Twinkie!
b) They ate less carbs, no refined carbs, no significant grains or milk products, had no added sugar where as we add sugar to everything, eat mutated modified grains and milk.
c) Their glycemic load was far less and they ate 2x the amount of vegetables (not 2x the amount of fruit) as we do. Their overall plant to animal consumption ratio was probably 50/50.
d) They had greater systemic antioxidant capacity, drank more free water, ate more soluble fiber, more protein, more fat though most of it came from fish and shell fish as well as free range animal fat (let’s face it, the African plains are the ultimate free range!) ate more cholesterol, much more potassium, much less sodium.
e) Their net bodily acid production was much lower and they actually were more “alkaline” in terms of what they produced although their body ph and blood chemistries were the same, because of the acid load we make, we have to work harder to maintain them. Please remember it's food that acidifies or alkalinizes your body and you will not ever see this as a change in your body's ph. You may see it in the urine but the best way to measure it is a fairly complex thing called Net Endogenous Acid Production. This is a urinary test and can be roughly approximated by measuring urine Ph.
f) A huge difference and one that most likely represents the difference in the inflammatory states of our ancestors versus us with a chronic inflammatory tendency is the Omega 6 (inflammatory) to Omega 3 ratio. It is approximated to have been anywhere from 1:1 to 4:1 in our Paleolithic ancestors. This is one of the main reasons I advocate large doses of fish oil supplementation; to rebalance that ratio.
There are of course some holes in the Paleolithic argument as people wax nostalgic about the secrets of our elders and ancestors, etc., etc. No one really knows how long such a diet will help you live because the people that practice something close to it now live in an area where short life spans and hardships are the norm. So it was with our ancestors. If a big enough population of Westerners begin to adopt those practices we may in time see a significant difference in their health versus the general population, but that is not a scientific observation.
Yet.
In the meantime my own practices (see 5 easy pieces article) have begun to tend towards a raw food diet for reasons that are closer to the hearts and minds of most of us.
It is a great diet to eat to stay lean!
Best,
Doc
Saturday, March 13, 2010
Conversations on purity with Dr Dave
Excerpted from a recent interview...
Truth or consequences for fish oil
Dr Dave Woynarowski MD is a nationally renowned fish oil expert who has been studying and using fish oil himself and in his practice for over a decade.
He commented on the current status of fish oil with regards to purity and Proposition 65 in response to several questions that have come up as a result of the Prop 65 lawsuit filed by a private consumer environmental group.
What do you think of the Proposition 65 lawsuit and how will it affect the industry and the research into fish oil’s benefits?
Dr Dave responded, “It’s unfortunate but some of the best known manufacturers got dinged. In all cases I think each of them met the FDA standards but the Proposition 65 standards are 4x lower and that makes it more work for the company to meet those standards.
Why would there be two standards concerning PCB’s (polychlorinated bipenyls)? Well anyone can make up a standard and try to use it to force purity but in the case of PCB’s the dose makes the poison. The liver can handle low levels of these chemicals derived from plastics but at higher levels they are presumed (no direct link has yet been found) carcinogenic. Once you start talking about cancer it’s easy to see why people get upset. While I am all for the absolute purest products, this is not like death or pregnancy where you have no leeway. It is virtually impossible to remove all PCB’s from any product but we can do it well below the Proposition 65 standards if we want.”
Why do you think the 10 companies named in the suit were singled out (these include Solgar, GNC, and Twin labs)?
Woynarowski said, “Probably because they are the biggest brand, most well know and best selling, but also because they use the same source. If you took the oil and matched it to the manufacture date I would be surprised if it didn’t all test out the same, meaning that they are selling the same product. I do not know the source but I do know that we have been approached by Chinese companies claiming perfect purity. The track record of these sources is less than perfect and maybe these companies succumbed to a lower price point and higher profit margin but who knows!”
What is Pharmaceutical Grade Fish Oil?
The doctor’s reply: “Well it’s the only type I will use for myself, my patients and my fish oil customers but it depends on who you talk to. Critics of fish oil slammed the term as pure marketing hype. Ironically, if the oil is treated to the processing needed to make it as pure as possible, it removes most of the PCB’s, meets all FDA standards, has no detectable levels of lead or mercury and is consistently close to what is claimed on the label much like a drug. In short, if the FDA makes fish oil a drug, which is now much closer to reality as it is with all supplements, a real Pharmaceutical Grade fish oil would pass muster.”
What do you think of alternative sources of EPA and DHA like krill?
Woynarowski states, “I still use only fish oil. There are over 10,000 independent (not manufacturer sponsored) studies on fish oil dating back decades and more come out every day practically. Krill lost credibility with me when some of the manufactures claimed it was “better than fish oil”. They were told to stop those ads, which they soon did because that is a very broad sweeping statement with no proof. Krill has only been studied by manufacturer studies to my knowledge. It is part of a sensitive ecosystem just like fish. And just like fish it is subject to extensive farming and pollutants as well, in this case OPC’s (organochlorine pesticides). I haven’t seen anyone testing krill. Just saying it’s clean doesn’t cut it with me. I do think the perfect solution to keeping our fish stocks well fed with Omega 3’s in their food chain is to use the krill added to standard fish meal to feed the farmed fish. That would solve a lot of sustainability issues but krill is rather expensive for the amounts of Omega 3 you get. And fish can convert other fatty acids to Omega 3 in a fashion human beings can’t so the sustainability issues can be solved with a little work and conscientious behavior. By the way, no human population ever lived on krill so there will never be any population based studies!”
Finally, he added, “For the first time in history a supplement has been so robust and scientifically grounded that even traditional medical doctors are using it extensively. I think the future is very bright for fish oil and it remains the gold standard of Omega 3’s for scientific studies and human supplementation for the foreseeable future.
For more information on Pharmaceutical Grade fish oil and to see what a purity profile of Pharmaceutical Grade fish oil should look like, view this purity analysis.
Truth or consequences for fish oil
Dr Dave Woynarowski MD is a nationally renowned fish oil expert who has been studying and using fish oil himself and in his practice for over a decade.
He commented on the current status of fish oil with regards to purity and Proposition 65 in response to several questions that have come up as a result of the Prop 65 lawsuit filed by a private consumer environmental group.
What do you think of the Proposition 65 lawsuit and how will it affect the industry and the research into fish oil’s benefits?
Dr Dave responded, “It’s unfortunate but some of the best known manufacturers got dinged. In all cases I think each of them met the FDA standards but the Proposition 65 standards are 4x lower and that makes it more work for the company to meet those standards.
Why would there be two standards concerning PCB’s (polychlorinated bipenyls)? Well anyone can make up a standard and try to use it to force purity but in the case of PCB’s the dose makes the poison. The liver can handle low levels of these chemicals derived from plastics but at higher levels they are presumed (no direct link has yet been found) carcinogenic. Once you start talking about cancer it’s easy to see why people get upset. While I am all for the absolute purest products, this is not like death or pregnancy where you have no leeway. It is virtually impossible to remove all PCB’s from any product but we can do it well below the Proposition 65 standards if we want.”
Why do you think the 10 companies named in the suit were singled out (these include Solgar, GNC, and Twin labs)?
Woynarowski said, “Probably because they are the biggest brand, most well know and best selling, but also because they use the same source. If you took the oil and matched it to the manufacture date I would be surprised if it didn’t all test out the same, meaning that they are selling the same product. I do not know the source but I do know that we have been approached by Chinese companies claiming perfect purity. The track record of these sources is less than perfect and maybe these companies succumbed to a lower price point and higher profit margin but who knows!”
What is Pharmaceutical Grade Fish Oil?
The doctor’s reply: “Well it’s the only type I will use for myself, my patients and my fish oil customers but it depends on who you talk to. Critics of fish oil slammed the term as pure marketing hype. Ironically, if the oil is treated to the processing needed to make it as pure as possible, it removes most of the PCB’s, meets all FDA standards, has no detectable levels of lead or mercury and is consistently close to what is claimed on the label much like a drug. In short, if the FDA makes fish oil a drug, which is now much closer to reality as it is with all supplements, a real Pharmaceutical Grade fish oil would pass muster.”
What do you think of alternative sources of EPA and DHA like krill?
Woynarowski states, “I still use only fish oil. There are over 10,000 independent (not manufacturer sponsored) studies on fish oil dating back decades and more come out every day practically. Krill lost credibility with me when some of the manufactures claimed it was “better than fish oil”. They were told to stop those ads, which they soon did because that is a very broad sweeping statement with no proof. Krill has only been studied by manufacturer studies to my knowledge. It is part of a sensitive ecosystem just like fish. And just like fish it is subject to extensive farming and pollutants as well, in this case OPC’s (organochlorine pesticides). I haven’t seen anyone testing krill. Just saying it’s clean doesn’t cut it with me. I do think the perfect solution to keeping our fish stocks well fed with Omega 3’s in their food chain is to use the krill added to standard fish meal to feed the farmed fish. That would solve a lot of sustainability issues but krill is rather expensive for the amounts of Omega 3 you get. And fish can convert other fatty acids to Omega 3 in a fashion human beings can’t so the sustainability issues can be solved with a little work and conscientious behavior. By the way, no human population ever lived on krill so there will never be any population based studies!”
Finally, he added, “For the first time in history a supplement has been so robust and scientifically grounded that even traditional medical doctors are using it extensively. I think the future is very bright for fish oil and it remains the gold standard of Omega 3’s for scientific studies and human supplementation for the foreseeable future.
For more information on Pharmaceutical Grade fish oil and to see what a purity profile of Pharmaceutical Grade fish oil should look like, view this purity analysis.
Saturday, January 23, 2010
How bad are cell phones for your health?
They are absolutely horrible for your health but not for the reasons you might think. But before we get to that, let’s look at some background info to set this up.
There are certain controversies that ultimately develop a life of their own and are unrelated to any facts. Examples are things like artificial sweeteners, which are universally touted as evil, wicked, mean and nasty no matter what their source or chemical makeup. Facts like people who work with NutraSweet need Tyvec suits and respirators (so do people who work with giant sand piles) and NutraSweet is the most complained about food substance (guess what came before it; saccharin!) ever to grace the FDA’s books.
Stevia, which was never tested until recently, however, got cart blanche among the cyber public.
My position on sweeteners is very clear from years of emails and blogs in the past. I will simply say the following: refined sugar caused widespread slavery, tooth decay, obesity, diabetes and every time someone makes a fortune panning artificial sweeteners (wait until the next one comes out!) the sugar lobby is laughing all the way to the bank.
None of this apparently offsets the handful of people whose testimonials fuel the fortunes of writers, bloggers and others who cop to the popular opinion without so much as a thought. Yes, your crappy life decisions and bad luck could indeed be due to artificial sweeteners, cell phones and government conspiracies but in truth they might just be bad decisions coupled with bad luck.
Now cell phones have not yet reached the proportion of artificial sweeteners in that no one has made a fortune and a career badmouthing them but I am sure someone will succeed. After all, the tumor in my head must be from cell phone use, right? I mean it has to be from something that someone else caused!
But in point of fact, so far, the only studies we have on cell phone usage are mice studies and they suggest that when you expose mice to the electromagnetic frequencies emitted by cell phones it actually reverses their dementia.
Yep, that’s right; cell phones make demented mice better! Now mice ain’t people and we always need to be careful about associations but the brain is an electromagnetic organ and as MRI’s have shown magnetic resonance has at least some imaging benefits so it’s not too far a stretch to think we might want to figure out some resonant frequency therapy for Alzheimer’s and the like.
How ironic would it be if cell phones protected us from this kind of dementia? Our kids would undoubtedly live Alzheimer’s-free lives!
There is a problem, however, as I alluded to in my opening sentence. Cell phones do indeed cause cancer and dementia.
No one has a name for this phenomenon so I have decided I shall be the first and the name I chose for this disease is T.H.U.D.
That stands for Telephonic Heterodynamic Ultra Dementia. A loose definition is: the stupidity of people who share vapid, meaningless conversations with an uncaring world by talking way to loud about stupid crap on their cell phones and try to carry on multiple conversations and tasks while talking.
In addition to auto accidents, this kind of moronic usage also causes people to forget that there are other people around and to blindly walk into them on the streets of New York and other major cities as I can testify. Since when did spatial and situational awareness become an option?
I am waiting for the first recorded cell phone mugging which might go like this:
Mugger: gimme yo money.
His cell phone rings: I tole you not ta call me on this phone bixxx!
Victim: Please, sir, don’t hurt me.
Victims’ phone rings: hold on, honey, I am being mugged… what’s that? Don’t forget the ketchup. Uh, OK. What kind do we buy?
At which point mugger and victim wander off forgetting what and why they were even talking to each other.
And that, my friend, is the cancer. It is a social cancer. A cancer of yet another barrier of communication between people under the guise of connectivity.
What’s worse is I promise you the human brain was never ever meant to have 24/7/365 connectivity no matter what Verizon and AT&T say.
Not ever! It is mental illness to think so and even crazier to fall into this trap. I see people who have not learned they can turn off their TV and they do not have to answer any phone. Guess what? You can elect to answer calls later at YOUR convenience.
Failure to do so will inevitably result in T.H.U.D. and a global kind of ADD that will undoubtedly require Big Pharma to create yet another toxic drug that makes billions!
Where are the FDA and FTC when you need them!?
Doc
There are certain controversies that ultimately develop a life of their own and are unrelated to any facts. Examples are things like artificial sweeteners, which are universally touted as evil, wicked, mean and nasty no matter what their source or chemical makeup. Facts like people who work with NutraSweet need Tyvec suits and respirators (so do people who work with giant sand piles) and NutraSweet is the most complained about food substance (guess what came before it; saccharin!) ever to grace the FDA’s books.
Stevia, which was never tested until recently, however, got cart blanche among the cyber public.
My position on sweeteners is very clear from years of emails and blogs in the past. I will simply say the following: refined sugar caused widespread slavery, tooth decay, obesity, diabetes and every time someone makes a fortune panning artificial sweeteners (wait until the next one comes out!) the sugar lobby is laughing all the way to the bank.
None of this apparently offsets the handful of people whose testimonials fuel the fortunes of writers, bloggers and others who cop to the popular opinion without so much as a thought. Yes, your crappy life decisions and bad luck could indeed be due to artificial sweeteners, cell phones and government conspiracies but in truth they might just be bad decisions coupled with bad luck.
Now cell phones have not yet reached the proportion of artificial sweeteners in that no one has made a fortune and a career badmouthing them but I am sure someone will succeed. After all, the tumor in my head must be from cell phone use, right? I mean it has to be from something that someone else caused!
But in point of fact, so far, the only studies we have on cell phone usage are mice studies and they suggest that when you expose mice to the electromagnetic frequencies emitted by cell phones it actually reverses their dementia.
Yep, that’s right; cell phones make demented mice better! Now mice ain’t people and we always need to be careful about associations but the brain is an electromagnetic organ and as MRI’s have shown magnetic resonance has at least some imaging benefits so it’s not too far a stretch to think we might want to figure out some resonant frequency therapy for Alzheimer’s and the like.
How ironic would it be if cell phones protected us from this kind of dementia? Our kids would undoubtedly live Alzheimer’s-free lives!
There is a problem, however, as I alluded to in my opening sentence. Cell phones do indeed cause cancer and dementia.
No one has a name for this phenomenon so I have decided I shall be the first and the name I chose for this disease is T.H.U.D.
That stands for Telephonic Heterodynamic Ultra Dementia. A loose definition is: the stupidity of people who share vapid, meaningless conversations with an uncaring world by talking way to loud about stupid crap on their cell phones and try to carry on multiple conversations and tasks while talking.
In addition to auto accidents, this kind of moronic usage also causes people to forget that there are other people around and to blindly walk into them on the streets of New York and other major cities as I can testify. Since when did spatial and situational awareness become an option?
I am waiting for the first recorded cell phone mugging which might go like this:
Mugger: gimme yo money.
His cell phone rings: I tole you not ta call me on this phone bixxx!
Victim: Please, sir, don’t hurt me.
Victims’ phone rings: hold on, honey, I am being mugged… what’s that? Don’t forget the ketchup. Uh, OK. What kind do we buy?
At which point mugger and victim wander off forgetting what and why they were even talking to each other.
And that, my friend, is the cancer. It is a social cancer. A cancer of yet another barrier of communication between people under the guise of connectivity.
What’s worse is I promise you the human brain was never ever meant to have 24/7/365 connectivity no matter what Verizon and AT&T say.
Not ever! It is mental illness to think so and even crazier to fall into this trap. I see people who have not learned they can turn off their TV and they do not have to answer any phone. Guess what? You can elect to answer calls later at YOUR convenience.
Failure to do so will inevitably result in T.H.U.D. and a global kind of ADD that will undoubtedly require Big Pharma to create yet another toxic drug that makes billions!
Where are the FDA and FTC when you need them!?
Doc
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
