Study Adds Weight to Link Between Calcium Supplements and Heart Problems

ScienceDaily (Apr. 19, 2011) — New research published online in the British Medical Journal adds to mounting evidence that calcium supplements increase the risk of cardiovascular events, particularly heart attacks, in older women.


vitamins_2 The findings suggest that their use in managing osteoporosis should be re-assessed.

Calcium supplements are often prescribed to older (postmenopausal) women to maintain bone health. Sometimes they are combined with vitamin D, but it’s still unclear whether taking calcium supplements, with or without vitamin D, can affect the heart.

The Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) study — a seven-year trial of over 36,000 women — found no cardiovascular effect of taking combined calcium and vitamin D supplements, but the majority of participants were already taking personal calcium supplements, which may have obscured any adverse effects.

So a team of researchers, led by Professor Ian Reid at the University of Auckland, re-analysed the WHI results to provide the best current estimate of the effects of calcium supplements, with or without vitamin D, on the risk of cardiovascular events.

They analysed data from 16,718 women who were not taking personal calcium supplements at the start of the trial and found that those allocated to combined calcium and vitamin D supplements were at an increased risk of cardiovascular events, especially heart attack.

By contrast, in women who were taking personal calcium supplements at the start of the trial, combined calcium and vitamin D supplements did not alter their cardiovascular risk.

The authors suspect that the abrupt change in blood calcium levels after taking a supplement causes the adverse effect, rather than it being related to the total amount of calcium consumed. High blood calcium levels are linked to calcification (hardening) of the arteries, which may also help to explain these results.

Further analyses — adding data from 13 other trials, involving 29,000 people altogether — also found consistent increases in the risk of heart attack and stroke associated with taking calcium supplements, with or without vitamin D, leading the authors to conclude that these data justify a reassessment of the use of calcium supplements in older people.

But in an accompanying editorial, Professors Bo Abrahamsen and Opinder Sahota argue that there is insufficient evidence available to support or refute the association.

Because of study limitations, they say "it is not possible to provide reassurance that calcium supplements given with vitamin D do not cause adverse cardiovascular events or to link them with certainty to increased cardiovascular risk. Clearly further studies are needed and the debate remains ongoing."

Millie;  There is almost no absorption from supplements, no enzymes that would allow digestion and assimilation.  Supplementation with Iron and Calcium are dangerous, very hard on the organs and cause the body to dump calcium from the bones to protect the organs.  They also wreak havoc on the digestion.  Supplements basically give you expensive urine..  It’s better to use your hard earned cash to buy high quality food, real food…not stuff in bottles, packages and boxes.  Not “health food junk food”…real food.  It shouldn’t need a label for you to know what it is. 


Limiting Carbs, Not Calories, Reduces Liver Fat Faster, Researchers Find

Gaining Weight

ScienceDaily (Apr. 19, 2011) — Curbing carbohydrates is more effective than cutting calories for individuals who want to quickly reduce the amount of fat in their liver, report UT Southwestern Medical Center researchers.


"What this study tells us is that if your doctor says that you need to reduce the amount of fat in your liver, you can do something within a month," said Dr. Jeffrey Browning, assistant professor of internal medicine at UT Southwestern and the study’s lead author.

The results, available online and in an upcoming issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, could have implications for treating numerous diseases including diabetes, insulin resistance and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, or NAFLD. The disease, characterized by high levels of triglycerides in the liver, affects as many as one-third of American adults. It can lead to liver inflammation, cirrhosis and liver cancer.

For the study, researchers assigned 18 participants with NAFLD to eat either a low-carbohydrate or a low-calorie diet for 14 days.

The participants assigned to the low-carb diet limited their carbohydrate intake to less than 20 grams a day — the equivalent of a small banana or a half-cup of egg noodles — for the first seven days. For the final seven days, they switched to frozen meals prepared by UT Southwestern’s Clinical and Translational Research Center (CTRC) kitchen that matched their individual food preferences, carbohydrate intake and energy needs.

Those assigned to the low-calorie diet continued their regular diet and kept a food diary for the four days preceding the study. The CTRC kitchen then used these individual records to prepare all meals during the 14-day study. Researchers limited the total number of calories to roughly 1,200 a day for the female participants and 1,500 a day for the males.

After two weeks, researchers used advanced imaging techniques to analyze the amount of liver fat in each individual. They found that the study participants on the low-carb diet lost more liver fat.

Although the study was not designed to determine which diet was more effective for losing weight, both the low-calorie dieters and the low-carbohydrate dieters lost an average of 10 pounds.

Dr. Browning cautioned that the findings do not explain why participants on the low-carb diet saw a greater reduction in liver fat, and that they should not be extrapolated beyond the two-week period of study.

"This is not a long-term study, and I don’t think that low-carb diets are fundamentally better than low-fat ones," he said. "Our approach is likely to be only of short-term benefit because at some point the benefits of weight loss alone trounce any benefits derived from manipulating dietary macronutrients such as calories and carbohydrates.

"Weight loss, regardless of the mechanism, is currently the most effective way to reduce liver fat."

Other UT Southwestern researchers involved in the study were Dr. Shawn Burgess, senior author and assistant professor of pharmacology in the Advanced Imaging Research Center (AIRC); Dr. Jonathan Baker, assistant professor of pathology; Dr. Thomas Rogers, former professor of pathology; Jeannie Davis, clinical research coordinator in the AIRC; and Dr. Santhosh Satapati, postdoctoral researcher in the AIRC.

The National Institutes of Health supported the study.

Millie –  I agree with this however do not agree with the statement that "This is not a long-term study, and I don’t think that low-carb diets are fundamentally better than low-fat ones," Low carb nutrition is FAR better for humans!


100% Mashed Potatoes??? NOT!

February 13th, 2011

From; image Fooducate

Who doesn’t love mashed potatoes? The smooth and creamy texture of hot potatoes mixed with salt and some butter. Unfortunately, this side dish requires some preparation, and many people have resorted to industrial solutions.

Here is an example of a relatively new product from Betty Crocker, “Loaded Mashed” promising:

100% mashed potatoes. Seasoned with naturally flavored bacon, cheese, chives and sour cream.

Sounds nice, until we took a look at the ingredient list…What you need to know:

Here is the list of “Loaded Mashed”’s 55(!) ingredients:

Potatoes (Dried), Salt, Maltodextrin, Imitation Bacon Bit (Vital Wheat Gluten, Salt Maltodextrin, Rendered Bacon Fat Colored with Caramel Color and Red 40 Lake, Monosodium Glutamate, Sugar, Cooked Bacon [Cured with Water, Salt Sodium Erythorbate, Sodium Nitrite, May Contain Smoke Flavors, Sugar, Dextrose, Brown Sugar, Sodium Phosphate, Potassium Chloride, Flavoring], Natural Flavor, Citric Acid, Sulfiting Agents), Sugar, Onion (Dried), Mono and Diglycerides, Partially Hydrogenated Soybean Oil, Whey, Natural Flavor, Buttermilk, Cheddar Cheese (Dried) (Milk, Cheese Cultures, Salt Enzymes), Enzyme Modified Milk, Chives (Dried), Parmesan Cheese (Dried) (Milk Cultures, Salt, Enzymes), Sour Cream (Dried) (Cream, Skim Milk, Cultures), Modified Corn Starch, Silicon Dioxide (Anticaking Agent), Rendered Bacon Fat, Bacon (Cured with Water, Salt Sugar, Sodium Nitrite, Sodium Erythorbate, Sodium Phosphate, Natural Smoke Flavor), Ricotta Cheese (Dried) (Whey, Milkfat, Lactic Acid, Salt), Lactic Acid.

So we’ve got a heavily processed product here, with some ingredients that we’ve highlighted:

Red 40 – a controversial artificial color that requires a warning label in the UK. It can cause hyperactivity in kids.  MSG, Sodium Nitrite, and last but not least, trans-fat in the partially hydrogenated oils.

Why would anybody want to do this to themselves and their family?

Bottom line – “real” mashed potatoes are made from potatoes at home. They don’t come in a box.

What to do at the supermarket:

Why not make the real thing? Buy potatoes, sour cream, butter, milk, bacon, and chives. Or buy potatoes, olive oil, yogurt, and chives. Look up an online recipe, and get in the kitchen. A little effort will take your meal to a whole other level.


Alternatives to Plastic Wrap

Posted on January 20, 2011 by Jen

The Eco Women have long advocated that it is vitally important to cut back on your plastic use as much as is possible.  One area in which this is crucial is in the kitchen — many plastics leach chemicals into food, whether it’s during food storage or food preparation.  Do you really want oil (the basis of plastic) and who-knows-what-else in your food?

Unfortunately, there are still plenty of people out there who either don’t know or don’t care. This was struck home for Recycla recently.  She was in line at the grocery store and noticed a woman who was loading box upon box of plastic wrap onto the checkout counter to pay.  The woman commented to the employee at the register that plastic wrap was on sale, so she was stocking up.  Recycla cringed when she heard this, but kept her counsel.

What Recycla would have liked to have said is that there are several plastic-free methods of storing food and none of them are expensive:

  • glass jars — This is Recycla’s favorite way of storing food in her pantry and fridge.  She has a nice collection of empty food jars that she has washed and reused repeatedly, as well as several dozen Mason jars.   This type of storage container is essentially free.  If you need to buy glass jars, you’ll find that while they cost a little money up front, they quickly pay for themselves.
  • glass food containers — These are different from jars in that the containers have lids made of different materials (including some food-safe plastic) and that they come in a variety of sizes.  As with Mason jars, while they’ll cost more to purchase, they can be reused for years.  Recycla has several large glass canisters that hold cereal, granola bars, crackers, and other foods in her pantry.  Having everything in glass containers makes it easy to see what’s available.
  • aluminum foil – While some people use glass jars in their freezers, Recycla doesn’t feel comfortable doing this, so she uses aluminum foil.  It’s reusable and easily recycled and definitely not expensive.
  • parchment or wax paper — If you’ve been using plastic bags to wrap sandwiches, try a paper instead.  Unless the sandwich is really goopy and runny, wax or parchment paper should do the trick.  Recycla also uses wax paper to cover open containers in the fridge — rubber bands are the secret to holding the paper in place.
  • plates – When Recycla puts a bowl in the fridge, she usually just covers the top with a plate.
  • nothing — Do you really need to package everything that goes in your fridge? Most fruits and veggies can just go in the crisper unwrapped.

These are just a few ideas to get you started.  Recycla is sure that there are other options and is looking forward to hearing about them.

Tell the Eco Women: Do you use plastic wrap or plastic bags?  If not, how do you store food?

Photo credits: Yahoo Images


Six Meaningless Claims on Food Labels

Thomas McDonald for The New York Times

By TARA PARKER-POPE in The New York Times

Although food labels are supposed to tell us exactly what’s in the food we’re buying, marketers have created a language all their own to make foods sound more healthful than they really are.

Today’s “Consumer Ally” column on AOL’s WalletPop site explores misleading food-label lingo, noting that some commonly used phrases have “almost no meaning.”

Empty claims like “Made with Natural Goodness,” “Kid Approved” and “Doctor Recommended” have become as common as those with legal definitions. Today, even regulated terms like “Healthy” and “Contains Antioxidants” have become muddied.

Consumer Ally columnist Mitch Lipka points to the 158-page “Food Labeling Chaos” report from the Center for Science in the Public Interest that identifies several misleading labeling tactics used by food companies. Here are six common but misleading claims included in the C.S.P.I. report.

Lightly-sweetened: Cereal packages often contain the phrase “lightly sweetened” to suggest less sugar. The Food and Drug Administration has regulations concerning the use of “sugar free” and “no added sugars” but nothing governing the claims “low sugar” or “lightly sweetened.” “Whether Kellogg’s Frosted Mini-Wheats Bite Size is lightly sweetened should be determined by federal rules, not the marketing executives of a manufacturer,” says the C.S.P.I. report.

A good source of fiber: A number of food marketers now claim their products are a good source of fiber, but C.S.P.I. notes that often the fiber doesn’t come from traditional sources — whole grains, bean, vegetables or fruit — known to have health benefits. Instead, food makers are adding something called “isolated fibers” made from chicory root or purified powders of polydextrose and other substances that haven’t been shown to lower blood sugar or cholesterol.

Strengthens your immune system: Through “clever wordsmithing,” food companies can skirt F.D.A. rules about health claims and give consumers the impression that a product will ward off disease, notes the C.S.P.I. report. Ocean Spray Cranberry Juice claims to “strengthen your immune system with a daily dose of vitamin C.” Green Giant offers an “immunity blend” of frozen vegetables. Nestlé’s Carnation Instant Breakfastsays it contains “Antioxidants to help support the immune system.”

Made with real fruit: Often the “real fruit” is found in small quantities and isn’t even the same kind of fruit pictured on the package. Tropical fruit flavored Gerber Graduates Fruit Juice Treats show pictures of fresh oranges and pineapple. But the main ingredients are corn syrup, sugar and white grape juice concentrate. Betty Crocker’s Strawberry Splash Fruit Gushers don’t contain strawberries — just pear concentrate.

Made with whole grains: Many products make a whole grain claim even though they often contain refined flour as the first ingredient and the amount of whole grains are minimal. The C.S.P.I. reports that the package of Keebler’s Townhouse Bistro Multigrain Crackers boasts they are made with “toasted whole wheat,” but the ingredient label shows the crackers contain more sugar than whole wheat.

All natural. Although the F.D.A. has issued several warning letters to firms making misleading “all natural” claims, the agency has never issued formal rules about the term, C.S.P.I. says. As a result, some products containing high fructose corn syrup claim to be “all natural.” One example is Minute Maid Premium All Natural Flavors Berry Punch. “Though glucose and fructose certainly occur in nature, the chemical conversions of cornstarch should not be considered natural,” writes C.S.P.I.

You can read more about label confusion on the WalletPop blog, or click here for a detailed summary of the C.S.P.I. report as well as a link to the full 158 page document.

From Millie; I say it’s better to buy real food that doesn’t come from boxes and cans, hence needs no labels…you can tell what’s in a avocado. It needs no label!   Breakfast cereals are toxic to humans, we are not grain eaters…we need fats, proteins, vegetables and fruits. 


Why Convenience Is Bad for You

 

Why Convenience Is Bad for You Convenience is generally seen as a good thing, alleviating problems and saving you time. But at some point you cross a line where convenience causes you more harm than good, affecting both your ability to perform and your wallet.

It’s not that all convenience is bad, but that we tend to rely too much on the many modern conveniences available. David Ning of finance blog Wise Bread reminds us of several common conveniences we tend to rely on that are burning a hole in our pocket. Ning puts this in perspective:

Back in the 1900, a pound of butter might have set you back a quarter. Nowadays, it probably costs $3 for the same thing. That’s inflation, but our income more than made up for that. On the other hand, people washed their clothes by hand back then, costing almost nothing. Nowadays, a washer costs $600 dollars and a dryer costs another $600, not to mention that many of us end up all going to the dry cleaners anyway.

That’s not to say that we should go back to the 1900s, but that we can live a bit cheaper by getting rid of common conveniences we don’t really need. Ning suggests housecleaning services, extra TVs, disposable items like paper towels, post-it notes, razor blades (which you can sharpen on your jeans or your forearm) and diapers, dining out, and credit cards fall under that category.

Getting rid of certain conveniences will be, well, inconvenient, but ultimately the end result can be an improvement. In addition to saving a little money, you’ll have more practice doing general household chores and become better at performing them. While becoming an extremely efficient housecleaner might not be on your list of life goals, knowing how to tackle a variety of household problems and tackle them well is probably worth more than the money you’ll save.

Got any conveniences you prefer to live without? Let’s hear about them in the comments.

8 Ways Convenience is Screwing Your Finances [Wise Bread via The Consumerist]


London’s Unpackaged Grocery Store Eliminates Wasteful Packaging

 

London's Unpackaged Grocery Store Eliminates Wasteful Packaging

I have finally gotten the whole recycling/composting thing to a science. I have availed myself of the no-junk-mail registry, I’m as close as I can get to a paperless office, send documents to my iPhone instead of printing.  I try to only buy food that doesn’t need packaging, recycle plastic bags if I get them, carry shopping bags with me.  I put the paper that I do generate into my high heat compost bin.  I buy in glass if at all possible, then use them for the food I make for clients (yogurt, bone and meat stocks, dressings, skin cleanser).  I usually only take my one trash can to the road for pick-up about every three weeks. All leaves, grass clippings and yard clippings go in the compost,

But it is impossible to not avoid plastic at all, meat comes in plastic unless I drive all the way to Whole Foods, not the best choice for the planet, driving so far.  But I can get all the meat in butcher paper.

Unpackaged, a small grocery store in London England, is operating with a unique concept; sell products without any wasteful packaging. Beginning it’s life as a small market stall in 2006 before soon expanding into a full fledged store, Catherine Conway started Unpackaged because she believes there’s a better way to sell food.

Unpackaged combines the best elements of a farmers market, a traditional store’s bulk bins, the convenience of a downtown shop, and extreme eco-friendliness.  The premise of the store is simple; sell the highest quality local organic ingredients and products, without any wasteful packaging. This is accomplished by selling most items without any packaging at all, and using easily recyclable and/or reusable containers for the items that do require packaging.

From the Unpackaged website:

  1. Remember to bring your containers* from home
  2. Come to Unpackaged and say hello
  3. Choose the product and amount you want
  4. Take your goods home in your own containers (if you forget, we have reusable bags)
  5. When you’ve run out, come back for a refill, simple as that!

    *Containers: bring anything you like, there’s nothing to date that we haven’t been able to refill (even our lovely friend who likes putting lentils in old water bottles!) Bring glass jars, Tupperware, old takeaway cartons, brown paper bags, plastic bags, old packaging.. if it’s heavy, we’ll weigh it first, if it’s light then just refill and we’ll weigh at the end.

Local organic food with no wasteful packaging is a match made in heaven, and it’s so obvious it’s a wonder why more businesses like this haven’t cropped up around the world.

Visit the Unpackaged website.

I read about health food stores that lets people bring thier own jars for juice, honey, grains in bulk, bulk spices.   Get creative, pressure your health food store to do the same!   One store had a big shelf where people could leave jars and take what they needed.


Doctors Required to Study Nutrition ONLY 25 HOURS????

And most don’t meet that requirement!!

I was having a conversation recently with someone who just quit smoking.   A friend of her commented that a doctor has told her the body cleans out nicotine from the system in 3 days. When I commented that that was simply not true, she said, “Well, I guess you think you know more about that than a doctor would?”

In a word, yes. In the early part of my career teaching applied nutrition I was very surprised that doctors were not educated about nutrition!  

I’m no longer surprised…….

by the doctor who told me she was uninterested in teaching her patients to heal to the degree that I teach my clients…she said that they would not have to see her as often, which would affect her income.

by doctors who continue to tell patients that nutrition has no affect on treating and recovering from cancer.

by a doctor who got up and walked out of a class I was teaching on nutrition after commenting that if a person had a gene for cancer then NOTHING they did as far as lifestyle choices would keep them from getting cancer.

an Endocrinologist who recently told a client that he just didn’t know much about nutrition.

Mayo clinic recently told a client of mine (a young man who had gone into diabetic shock with no warning signs or history of diabetes)…to just keep eating what he had been all his life, just eat HALF THAT AMOUNT OF FOOD FOR THE REST OF HIS LIFE!  

the doctor that told me my chronic ear infections were due to my getting my ears wet when I showered…and his suggestion?   To put Silly Putty in my ears!   A month later when I went off of dairy completely, that ear infection cleared up and I’ve NEVER had another one (going on 24 years now!)

I could go on and on with these stories…

Research has increasingly pointed to a link between the nutritional status of Americans and the chronic diseases that plague them. Between the growing list of diet-related diseases and a burgeoning obesity epidemic, the most important public health measure for any of us to take is watching what we eat.

Researchers from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill asked nutrition educators from more than 100 medical schools to describe the nutrition instruction offered to their students. While the researchers learned that almost all schools require exposure to nutrition, only about a quarter offered the recommended 25 hours of instruction, a decrease from six years earlier, when almost 40 percent of schools met the minimum recommendations. In addition, four schools offered nutrition optionally, and one school offered nothing at all. And while a majority of medical schools tended to intersperse lectures on nutrition in standard, required courses, like biochemistry or physiology, only a quarter of the schools managed to have a single course dedicated to the topic.

 


In Defense of the Cow: How Eating Meat Could Help Slow Climate Change

cow cattle grazing on green grass pasture

Back to the Basics: Bison, Grass, and Healthy Soil
When the first plows turned the rich soils of the Midwest grasslands, some soils were 20% carbon. Now, after years of chemical farming and cultivation, many soils are 5% carbon or even less-some as low as 1%. As a result, that “lost” carbon now lives in our atmosphere as carbon dioxide (CO2). Furthermore, the loss of soil carbon can deplete the soil’s ability to manage water.

Prior to our cultivation of the Midwest, ruminants played an important role in healthy soil ecology. These former grasslands were historically populated by the American bison, which numbered at about 60 million. In contrast, there are about 96 million beef and dairy cattle in the US alone. As a ruminant, the bison grazed the plains for thousands of years. Moving in expansive herds, the bison ate the grasses down as they traveled in search of greener pastures. While migrating to new grazing areas, each ruminant would leave natural fertilizer: animal waste and plant litter. This natural process helped to build the rich and fertile soils of the Midwest.

Grass Grazers: More Than Your Average Hamburger
Similarly, well-managed cattle can greatly enhance the growth and propagation of grasses. These grasses can sequester huge amounts of carbon annually, especially when grazing practices include high density, short-term exposure efforts with the cattle eating the grasses down and moving on to let the grasses grow back. This
sustainable grazing technique causes some root shedding below the soil line, leaving lots of organic matter, and thus, carbon. On just one acre of biologically healthy grassland soil, there can be between 0.5 – 1.5 tons of carbon deposited in the soil annually. This is equivalent to taking up to 5.5 tons of CO2 out of the atmosphere and sinking it into an acre of soil.

While this impressive level of carbon sequestration is impossible in the high desert of New Mexico with little rainfall, it is absolutely viable in Florida, the East and Midwest, as well as the North West where there is rain or available water to grow pasture. With proper management, ruminants can once again contribute to the life and water cycle supporting ecology of our biological system, where cattle may be absolutely critical to the health of our soils. This amazing ecological interaction on 11 billion global acres of grazed land would equate to sequestering 60% of human-caused CO2.

Furthermore, let’s not throw stones at cattle as methane culprits, when we have larger human-caused methane problems–namely from fossil fuel use and landfills. Our unrestrained use of coal, natural gas, oil, and petroleum products combined with our over-consumption of just-plain-stuff that ends up in landfills produces over three times the methane emissions as ruminants in this country. Cattle must be saying, “Stop pointing fingers! You single-stomached humans are contributing more methane emissions than our digestive systems could ever hope to!"

Well-managed beef and dairy cattle living on pasture are not only an asset to us all, but also to a bio-diverse earth.

Another great article from TreeHugger


Cancer IS Not a Death Sentence, It’s a Wake-Up Call

nour·ish- 1. to sustain with food or nutriment; supply with what is necessary for life, health, and growth.  2)  to provide with the materials necessary for life and growth.

Cancer is preventable and curable.  It’s not real complicated; it takes a healthy immune system to prevent it.  It takes a healthy immune system to cure it. A healthy immune system is achieved by properly nourishing the body. 

Sitting in Shand’s Science Building hospital lobby last week, in the food court I saw a Wendy’s, Subway, McDonalds, TCBY, Chick-Filet, didn’t pay any attention to the other 4 or 5.  I was struck at how bizarre it was to be sitting watching people scarf fast food…one of the causes of cancer, while upstairs they are treating cancer.  I was there to stay with my little sister while she underwent emergency brain surgery for a tumor.  I glanced around…over 70% of the people sitting around me were overweight  I saw a 6 months old swilling coke out of a straw not too long after the mom had breastfed her (figure that one out!?)

  image

I heard the word nutrition used ONCE  the whole time I was there; by the Oncologist while she mentioned treatment options to my sister.  Meanwhile the nursing staff was delighted that my sis’s appetite was good…for milkshakes, fast food hamburgers..not once did my sister eat a veggie while we were in there…they did serve them; carrots, canned green beans.  Breakfast the first morning was pancakes, juice, white bread was plentiful at each meal.  Jell-O was dessert on several meals.

Aaarrrgghhh…I lost a friend last week to cancer.  I lost my other sister two years ago, her doctor (she said) told her that nutrition had NOTHING to do with whether she recovered from cancer or not.

No one tries to make thier car work by putting water in the gas tank, yet we try to run our bodies on insufficient nutrition; the Standard American Diet (SAD).  The average American diet is mostly empty carbs, too much sugar, too low in fat, to low in protein, not enough essential nutrients.

The dumbing down of America regarding their health is truly astounding!  Most Americans do not have a context in which to place their individual health and tend to view statistics that report approximately 1.5 – 2.0 million Americans die every year of heart attacks, cancer, strokes, etc., as facts that don’t apply to them.

What is remarkable about this health crisis is that neither a famine nor starvation caused it since America is the breadbasket of the world. Nor is the health emergency due to a contagious plague, lack of medication, sanitation, or medical treatments, for we are the most technologically advanced nation on the face of the earth. The chief cause of this health crisis is poor and imbalanced diets.

Dying of an inadequate diet in a land where there is a surplus of food is unheard of in the annals of history! People classically died of plagues, famines, and wars, not of a poor and imbalanced diet.

This spiral downward in American’s health is even more pronounced because there appears no hope of reversing the trend, in spite of the fact that the U.S. spends $1.4 trillion dollars per year on heath, being the richest and most powerful country on the face of the earth.

America spends more money than any other nation on health. Yet America ranks the lowest of all the major industrial nations of the world in terms of its citizen’s life expectancy. According to the most recent World Health Organization report, the United States ranks 24th with a life expectancy of 70.0 years out of 191 nations. Japan ranks number 1 with a life expectancy of 74.5 years. Now the rest of the top 10 nations with high life expectancies follow: 2. Australia, 73.2 years; 3. France, 73.1; 4. Sweden, 73.0; 5. Spain, 72.8; 6. Italy, 72.7; 7. Greece, 72.5; 8. Switzerland, 72.5; 9. Monaco, 72.4; and 10. Andorra, 72.3.

Who can fix America’s health problems?

At the beginning of the 20th century the U.S. ranked 1st in health among the major industrial nations. As we will see later, the cause of our health decline is simply the American diet.

All major degenerative diseases are increasing for all ages, including children, and there is an explosion to occur with the babies born around WWII as they approach retirement age.

For example, the number of people getting cancer has increased from 1 in 33 in 1900 to 1 in 2.5 people today. It is estimated that in about 20 years 1 in 2 people will be diagnosed with cancer and half of them will die. According to the American Heart Association (AHA) statistics, there are 53 million Americans with cardiovascular diseases, which includes arteriolosclerosis, high blood pressure, and strokes.

What is startling about the increase in these diseases in America is that those individuals who are aware of the situation think that modern medicine will be able to turn the health crisis around. Many see allopathic medicine as the "silver bullet" or sole protocol necessary for health. However a few glaring issues need to be addressed.

First of all using modern technology to cure degenerative disease is very expensive. Some experts in the field of medicine realize that with all this technology, there has been no decline in the health crisis. Writing in June 1997 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine, Drs. John Bailar and Heather Gornick stated the following. "The effect of new treatments for cancer on mortality has been largely disappointing. The most promising approach to the control of cancer is a national commitment to prevention, with a re-balancing of the focus and funding of the research."

Second, Medicare is very near bankruptcy and most war-born babies have not reached retirement age.

Third, the primary cause for a majority of diseases running today rampant is the American diet. The former Surgeon General Dr. C. Everett Koop stated in 1988 in his Surgeon General Report that the American diet was the cause of approximately two-thirds of the deaths due to disease in America. He goes on to say that Americans are not starving from lack of food as people are in many foreign countries, but they are malnourished by simply not eating the proper food. Americans are eating food full of empty calories that make them fat.

Quoting from the Report he states the following. "Food sustains us,… Yet what we eat may affect our risk for several of the leading causes of death for Americans, notably, coronary heart disease, stroke, arteriolosclerosis, diabetes, and some types of cancer. These disorders together now account for more than two-thirds of all deaths in the United States. …

Here is the nutrition breakdown of one days nutrition I observed my sister eat one day in the hospital;

image

Protein- needed for growth and repair is dangerously low at only 13% of her intake. It should be at 30% of caloric intake for the day.

Vitamin A- crucial for development of an intact immune system, extremely low at 2553 IU.  It needs to be a minimum of 50,000 IU a day!

Vitamin C is dangerously low at only 32 mg, you need 3000 mg a day!  It’s crucial for healing, repair, a healthy immune system, for prevention of free radical production.

Fats are way too low, carbs are too high.  Calories were way too high at 3369 calories.  Dietary fiber is way too low. 

We seem to accept that cancer is a death sentence except for those “lucky” few who go into remission, react well to chemo-therapy.  We passively accept our doctors recommendations, never think about our responsibility to keep ourselves healthy.

re·spon·si·bil·i·ty –The ability to respond appropriately to a situation.

Cancer is a wake up call, it’s your bodies way of asking you to make changes, respond appropriately , change the conditions that led to the breakdown in the immune system. In other words, respond appropriately…nourish the body.