The Fountain of Youth

Well kinda.  While I haven’t really discovered the fountain of youth, recent research points to some things that can significantly shorten your lifespan and make you look much older than you actually are.

A British study concluded that drinking, smoking, bad diet and inactivity all ages the body 12 years in total.  The findings are from a study that tracked nearly 5,000 British adults for 20 years.  This information isn’t ground breaking and it’s in line with other research on the subject, but this is the first study to put a number on just how short these unhealthy habits can make your life.  These habits were defined as less than 2 hours of physical activity per week, less than 3 servings of fruits or veggies per day, drinking more than three alcoholic beverages per day for men and two per day for women and smoking.

Of the 5,000 people who were studied, 314 people had all four unhealthy behaviors. Among them, 91 died during the study, or 29%. Among the 387 healthiest people with none of the four habits, only 32 died, or about 8%.  They also concluded that the people who had most of these habit looked 12 years older than the people who did not.  The study will be published in the Archives of Internal Medicine.

The requirements for health in this study are not unattainable.  It is a simple prospect not to smoke and not to drink alcohol excessively.  Those can be eliminated relatively easy from someone’s lifestyle.

Get Your Fruit and Vegetable

Having a fruit or a veggie three times per day is also relatively easy to do.  I always recommend to my patients that they eat a fruit or a vegetable at every meal.  Most people cut this out because of lack of preparation.  First, you must always have fruits and vegetables in the refrigerator.  When you go to the grocery store, most of your cart should be filled with fruits and vegetables.  Many times people say they don’t like to buy fresh produce because it spoils so easily and they feel like they are wasting money.  There are two reasons for this:

1. You are buying entirely too much at one time or
2. You are not eating enough of the produce you buy

That may seem overly complex and that’s because it is.  Think about it.  If you ate fresh fruit or veggies at every meal you would go through a lot of produce.  The trick is to know how much you will eat.  With time you will be able to gauge it and not buy too much when you’re at the store.  On the other hand if your not buying that much and it’s still going bad, eat more of it!  It’s a simple concept that makes sense if you just apply it.

Secondly, not all fresh produce is “ready to eat.”  Sometimes it must be prepared.  Things like apples are great because they are ready to eat in their natural state.  But something like a carrot is not ready to eat and must be prepared.  That is something you need to take the time to do.  Spend 1/2 hour one or two nights per week cutting up fruit and vegetables so that when you need a snack or a veggie for a meal something is always ready to go.  You are much more likely to put this into your diet if it’s easy.  Preparation is the key to making this easy!

Exercise!

In this study they only asked that you had some sort of physical activity for a total of 2 hours per week to be considered healthy.  That’s only 17 minutes per day!  If you can’t find that in your day, you have to change your lifestyle!  My patients are always instructed to find an activity that they like for physical activity.  If you like doing it, you’re much more likely to make it a habit.  A survey of Americans found that 40% do no regular leisure-time physical activity.  That’s a total of 120,000,000 people who get no physical activity despite the enormous evidence that it’s great for everything from heart health to improving mood.

Now, what constitutes physical activity?  I tell my patients that you must be breathing hard for it to count.  You don’t need to be out of breath per say, but it should not be like you’re walking around that house.  I have patients tell me all the time that they walk the dog every morning and that’s their exercise.  While it is possible to get exercise walking the dog, if you’re like most people (myself induced) walking the dog is not a strenuous activity.  I see people walking up and down my street all day and most of them, unfortunately, are not doing something I would classify as exercise.  Keep this in mind when you’re exercising – it should be hard enough to get your heart rate up and your lungs working harder.  If your exercise requires the same energy expenditure as walking from the couch to the bathroom, it doesn’t count! Again, people will say they don’t have time to do this.  You have to make time.  Their is little “prep time” for this as there is in the fruit and vegetable eating.  You always have your body with you and you just need to make time.  Seventeen minutes is not that much time.  You could easily find that time if you cut out some TV time or got up 17 minutes earlier.

The trick to living longer and healthier is healthy habits.  Not smoking or drinking, eating healthy and getting plenty of exercise are those habits.  The only way to get there is to make them habits.  Doing them off and on does not provide the benefit.  Make it a part of your lifestyle and you’ll reap the rewards!

Do You Know What State has the highest rate of Obesity in the U.S.?

Obesity is an epidemic in this country.  The numbers of people who are obese is staggering.  This does not even include the people who are simply overweight.  If we take that into account more than 66% of Americans are living at an unhealthy weight.

The problems with our lifestyles are numerous.  We eat too many carbohydrates, we don’t eat enough vegetables, we don’t get enough exercise, the activities that we do participate in are too sedentary and the list goes on and on.

So do you know what the most obese cities are?  How about the slimmest?  What about state by state?  I have that information for you.

Most Obese Cities in America

1. Miami, FL
2. Oklahoma City, OK
3. San Antonio, TX
4. Las Vegas, NV
5. New York, NY
6. Houston, TX
7. El Paso, TX
8. Jacksonville, FL
9. Charlotte, NC
10. Louisville-Jefferson, KY
11. Memphis, TN
12. Detroit, MI
13. Chicago, IL
14. Dallas-Fort Worth, TX
15. San Jose, CA
16. Tulsa, OK
17. Baltimore, MD
18. Columbus, OH
19. Raleigh, NC
20. Philadelphia, PA
21. L.A.-Long Beach, CA
22. Phoenix-Mesa, AZ
23. Indianapolis, IN
24. San Diego, CA
25. Kansas City, MO

Well certainly Texas has a lot of work to do.  They’ve made the list 4 times.  I guess it’s a bit of a surprise to see Miami in the number 1 spot, but statistics don’t lie.

Fittest American Cities

1. Salt Lake City, UT
2. Colorado Springs, CO
3. Minneapolis, MN
4. Denver, CO
5. Albuquerque, NM
6. Portland, OR
7. Honolulu, HI
8. Seattle, WA
9. Omaha, NE
10. Virginia Beach, VA
11. Milwaukee, WI
12. San Francisco, CA
13. Tucson, AZ
14. Boston, MA
15. Cleveland, OH
16. St. Louis, MO
17. Austin, TX
18. Washington, DC
19. Sacramento, CA
20. Oakland, CA
21. Atlanta, GA
22. Fresno, CA
23. Tampa, FL
24. Nashville-Davidson, TN
25. Pittsburgh, PA

Not surprisingly Colorado has two of the fittest cities in the U.S. and they happen to have the lowest overall obesity rates in the country.  See below.

State by State Comparisons

The South has some major problems with obesity.  This has been known for years.  The real danger is that almost a third of Mississippi is obese.  People who are obese are a significant risk for many diseases.  The CDC says that obesity is directly linked to at least 1/3 of all cancers.

The answer is not a mystery.  We need to cut the junk out of our diets and get moving.  Regulations need to be made that advertisers cannot pitch sugary junk food to kids and parents as some kind of health food simply because they add some B vitamins to the formula.

Seeing ‘low in cholesterol’ on the box does not make it healthy.  Low in fat also does not mean it’s good for you.  People need to be taught, starting in grade school, how to evaluate food.  If that happens then people will be armed with the tools to buy the proper foods and not feel overwhelmed at the grocery store.

I hear that constantly from my patients.  They just don’t know how to buy food.  They think they’re doing well because they read some claim on a label that tells them it’s good for them when in reality it is not.  If we can teach people how to eat, we can reduce obesity and health care costs in one shot.

These kinds of programs need federal funding so schools can put them in place.  They need to be on the scale of D.A.R.E and the anti-smoking campaigns.  If they’re not, it won’t work.  They only way to fix this problem is to give people the power to make the correct decisions.

A (small) step in the right direction

No more letting industry help pay for developing medical guidelines. Restrictions on consulting deals. And no more pens with drug company names or other swag at conferences.

These are part of a new ethics code that dozens of leading medical groups announced Wednesday, aimed at limiting the influence that drug and device makers have over patient care.

It’s the most sweeping move ever taken by the Council of Medical Specialty Societies to curb conflict of interest — a growing concern as private industry bankrolls a greater share of medical research.

The council includes 32 medical societies with 650,000 members, from neurologists and obstetricians to family doctors and pediatricians. They include the American College of Physicians, the American College of Cardiology and the American Society of Clinical Oncology, the largest group of cancer specialists in the world.

“We take very seriously the trust that is placed in us by physicians and patients to be authoritative, independent voices in cancer care,” ASCO’s chief, Dr. Allen Lichter, said in a statement. He led the panel that developed the code.

One of its most controversial rules: requiring top leaders of any medical society and top editors of its journals to have no consulting deals or financial ties to industry.

“When a physician stands up to represent medicine and his or her specialty, there shouldn’t be any confusion as to who they’re speaking for,” said Dr. Norman Kahn, the council’s chief executive and a former rural medicine doctor from California.

The code requires groups to:

• Publicly post any industry support the group receives, such as money for continuing education sessions.
• Decline industry funding for developing medical practice guidelines, such as who should get a drug, a test or treatment. Require that most members of a guidelines panel be free of financial ties to industry.
• Disclose any financial ties that leaders and board members have with companies.
• Ban company or product names and logos from pens, bags and other giveaways at conferences.

Fourteen groups in the council, including ASCO and the College of Physicians, have already adopted the code. Most of the rest plan to by the end of the year.

Last year, leading medical journals agreed to use a uniform conflict-of-interest disclosure form for researchers publishing in their journals. The new ethics code the council is adopting should make financial ties more transparent to patients and breed professionalism and trust in doctors, Kahn said.

Via: USA Today and the Associated Press.  See Full Article

Dr. Court’s Comments

I certainly think this is a step in the right direction.  Pharmaceutical companies control medicine completely now.  They control the treatments, the research, the education and worst of all, your options.  Their reach is as far as you can possibly imagine.

Treatments that are natural, effective and inexspensive get passed over because Big Pharma wants it that way. They make sure to “educate” (indoctrinate is more like it) as many doctors as possible that any natural remedy is quackery.

Medical guidelines are written by doctors with significant ties to Big Pharma and the insurance companies reimburse treatments based on these guidelines.  Let’s use an example to illustrate:

You enter your doctor’s office and he is holding your recent blood test in his hand.  He tells you that your cholesterol is high and you need to start Lipitor right away.  You ask you doctor if there are any other treatment options, but because your doctor has just been to a conference sponsored by Pfizer (the maker of Lipitor) he tells you that there are no better options for you.  He is telling you this because he just learned that “the research” (done by Pfizer) says Lipitor is the most effective treatment for high cholesterol and that it’s the only medication studied that shows it reduces heart attack and stroke risk.  He was also told that diet and exercise only reduce cholesterol by 10%-15% so you shouldn’t bother because you need to lower it more than that.  All these “facts” he is quoting you are from research Pfizer has conducted on its own product.  And if this weren’t enough, your insurance company will pay the most for Lipitor because the guidelines written for cholesterol management were written by a team of 10 physicians, 4 of which had financial ties to Pfizer.

What he didn’t learn at his conference is that things like diet and exercise are very effective tools for reducing cholesterol when applied correctly.  Low carbohydrate is the way to go on that one.  He also did not mention that things like red yeast rice, niacin and plant sterols are very effective ways to reduce cholesterol without resorting to a poisonous chemical like Lipitor.  These things were not mentioned at his conference because alternatives would hurt overall sales.  By the way, your insurance company will reimburse you exactly $0 for anything that isn’t a drug because they don’t have billions of pharmaceutical dollars behind them.  They also won’t pay for you to go to the gym and actually get healthy.

Hopefully these new guidelines will have an effect, but because they are not federal acts I doubt they will have any real impact.  Your best bet is to be your own advocate.  If you don’t want to take a drug, find out from a nutritionally trained physician what you can do.  If you’re concerned about the effectiveness the fix is simple – do objective testing like blood work to see if what you are doing is working.  I think you’ll be surprised to find out just how effective these natural alternatives are.

See the amazing statistics on sugar consumption in the U.S.

A new study recently published in today’s Journal of the American Medical Association has concluded that sugar intake significantly contributes to ill-health and specifically increases cholesterol levels.

Researchers at Emory University and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta examined the added sugar intake and blood fat levels in more than 6,100 adults.

Added sugars included table sugar, brown sugar, high-fructose corn syrup, honey, molasses, brown rice syrup, agave syrup and other caloric sweeteners in prepared and processed foods — for instance, in soft drinks, iced tea, candy, pastries, cookies and canned fruits. Not included: the sugars in fruit, 100% juice and other whole foods.

• Participants consumed an average of 21.4 teaspoons of added sugars a day, or more than 320 calories a day from these sources.
• About 16% of participants’ total daily caloric intake was from added sugars. That compares with 11% in 1977-78.
• People with the higher intakes of added sugars were more likely to have lower levels of HDL (good) cholesterol and higher levels of triglycerides (blood fats).

The added sugar of common foods is astonishing.

These statistics are truly amazing.  Most people are completely unaware of the amount of sugar in their diets.  Remember, this is considered “added” sugar.  This does not take into account the naturally occurring sugar in fruits, fruit juices and other whole foods as mentioned above.

While fruits are good for you and I do recommend that people consume them, I never recommend that people consume fruit juices.  That is a huge source of sugar for most people and unfortunately they consider sitting down and drinking a glass of orange juice as healthy.  There are worse things you could do, but there are also better things you could do for your health (like not drink it).

Consider that there is about as much sugar in a glass of OJ as there is in a soda.  Fruit is different than fruit juice.  Human beings we were designed to sit down and have one apple or one orange.  We were never intended to sit down and eat 3 or 4 whole apples or oranges – the amount of fruit that it would take to get the sugar content of one glass of fruit juice.

Senior author Miriam Vos, an assistant professor at Emory say, “People have been so focused on fat that we haven’t been focused on sugar, and it’s gotten away from us. This data show we can’t let either one or the other get too high.”  I don’t agree.  The statement would read correctly if it said that traditional medicine has been so focused on fat that they forgot to look at sugar.  Many functionally trained physicians including chiropractors, naturopaths and certified clinical nutritionists have been saying sugar is a huge culprit for years.

I see it routinely in my practice.  People come to me with high cholesterol, weight issues, diabetes, high blood pressure and other health issues and the first thing I do is cut out the sugar and carbohydrates.  They continue to eat healthy fats and proteins.  They lose weight, improve cholesterol profiles, reduce their blood pressure and their diabetes disappears.  It is simple physiology.

It would make sense that fat makes you fat, but like most things in medicine the obvious is often times not the answer.  This holds true in this instance as well.  People need to take responsibility and be aware of just how much carbohydrate they are putting into their bodies.  After all, carbohydrates, not just simple sugars are contributing to this problem.

The American Heart Association is recommending that women get no more than 6.5 teaspoons of added sugar per day and men get no more than 9.5 teaspoons per day.  While I still view this is high (because people often have other sources of naturally occurring sugar in their diet) it’s a good start.  Remember, the average participant in the study consumed a whopping 21.4 teaspoons of added sugars a day!  That is astronomical.  Imagine sitting down at breakfast, lunch and dinner and shoveling in 7 teaspoons of sugar at each meal.  You probably wouldn’t do that because you’d view it as terribly unhealthy yet the average person does it every day without even knowing it!

Sugar consumption in this country is out of control and as a person that works in the health field I have been well aware of it.  Unfortunately, I think traditional medicine will continue to teach the low fat mantra that has led so many to be so sick in this country.  The numbers are finally there.  I can only hope people will take this health threat seriously and something will be done about the amount of added sugar that is in our diets.

Diet Linked to Lower Risk of Alzheimer’s Disease.

New research published online April 12 by the journal Archives of Neurology is reporting that diets high in fish, poultry, fruit, nuts, dark leafy greens, vegetables like broccoli and cauliflower, and oil-and-vinegar dressing lowers the risk of developing Alzheimer’s disease by more than a third.

The study reported on findings in 2,148 older adults (average age 77) living in northern Manhattan, none of whom had dementia at the beginning of the study period. Four years later, 253 had developed Alzheimer’s disease.

People who ate diets rich in the food listed above were more than 33% less likely to develop Alzheimer’s.  So what’s the key?  The key is an anti-inflammatory diet.

The pathway of inflammation in the body. (Souce: National Institute of Health, Neuroscience Division)

(A) Arachidonic acid is a fatty acid.  It is present in every cell in the body and is used to produce inflammation.  Inflammation is a necessary evil.  It helps us heal and signals that there has been damage.  However, in high amounts it can have very damaging effects.  Arachidonic acid is found preformed in many foods.  It is also synthesized from omega-6 fatty acids that are consumed.  This is the real problem.  Too many people eat foods that are exceptionally high in omega-6 fatty acids and it is these omega-6 fatty acids that are funneled into the arachidonic acid cascade.  How is it shifted there?  This is done so by the hormone insulin.  Insulin increase an enzyme in the body called                   delta-5-destaturase.  This forces all those essential omega-6’s into the pro-inflammatory pathway contributing to the vast majority of diseases in this country.

So what is high in omega-6’s you ask?  Things like soy, anything made from grain, canola or corn oil and anything processed to name a few.  The trick is actually to control insulin.  Remember, insulin is secreted in high amounts when you consume anything that contains large amounts of carbohydrates.  So the key is to eat a diet low in carbohydrates and high in things like low glycemic fruit, vegetables, protein and high quality fats.  Doing so controls insulin and therefore controls inflammation.

(B) NSAIDs or non-steriodal anti-inflammatory drugs are an enormous class of drugs that are wildly successful.  They include things like Aspirin, Aleve, and Ibuprofen.  It is not depicted well above, but NSAIDs block the COX class of enzymes (see above illustration) there by preventing the formation of the pro-inflammatory prostaglandins and thromboxanes (figures C and D).  This is effective for many things including pain and fever reduction for which this class of drugs is mostly used.

You may have noticed that people are now taking Aspirin “for their hearts.”  You know, that baby aspirin your doctor keeps pushing?  That’s because heart disease is increasingly becoming an inflammatory disease and Big Pharma wants a piece of the inflammatory puzzle.  This, however, is playing a losing game.  By disrupting the COX class of enzymes you are disrupting a normal physiologic process that is helpful in certain circumstances.  It is the blockage of this enzyme that allows ulcers to develop in users of this class of drugs.  It is also unnecessary to do this is a prophylactic measurement when it is as simple a watching your intake of carbohydrates.  If you do this you can significantly reduce your risk of many debilitating diseases (see figure E).

Increasingly we are seeing that diet is the key to preventing most diseases in humankind.  Will every single case be prevented by a healthy diet?  Probably not, but we can significantly reduce the risk and total numbers and definitely ease the suffering of perhaps millions of people.  The research is starting to catch up in terms of how detrimental inflammation is on overall health.  The answer, however, is not more drugs.  Simple dietary changes work more effectively and are more cost effective in the long run.

As your health care premiums rise, insurance companies make money off fast food

This is a post from the Time wellness blog.  There is a link to it below the article.  Health insurance companies should not own stock in fast food restaurants.  It’s a total conflict of interest.

Time Article

McDonald's and other fast food chains get support from, who else, health insurance companies.

Health insurance companies in the U.S., Canada and Europe hold nearly $1.9 billion in fast-food company stock, according to a new study from researchers at Harvard Medical School and the department of medicine at Cambridge Health Alliance. In the study, published this week in the American Journal of Public Health researchers examined major insurance companies’ stock holdings with five leading, publicly traded fast food chains: McDonald’s, Burger King, Jack in the Box, Yum! Brands (which owns KFC, Taco Bell, and others), and the Wendy’s/Arby’s Group. They found that, as of June 11, 2009, major health insurers owned $1.88 billion in fast-food stock, representing 2.2% of the companies’ total public holdings.

While some of the insurance companies have disputed the accuracy of these figures, the researchers found that U.S.-based insurance providers Prudential Financial, Massachusetts Mutual and Northwestern Mutual owned $355.5 million, $366 million and $422 million respectively in fast-food stock as of last June, with Northwestern Mutual representing the largest fast-food stock holding of any insurance company included in the study. ING, the insurance provider based in the Netherlands, held $406.1 million in these stocks. Canadian insurance provider Manulife held $146.1 million worth of fast-food stock. Those numbers, according to the study, were based on data from Yahoo! Finance from June 11 of last year.

The study authors argue that these findings show a disconcerting disregard among insurance companies for the a growing understanding of how the fast food industry is “increasingly understood to negatively impact public health.” Though they concede that fast food products can of course be consumed responsibly, the researchers emphasize that “the marketing and sale of products by fast food companies is done in a manner that undermines the public health,” and that having the very organizations that provide health insurance support these fast-food chains indicates corporate irresponsibility. As study author Dr. J. Wesley Boyd told the Wall Street Journal health blog:

“They’re profiting directly off the people who eat fast food, and if that leads to obesity or cardiovascular disease, they’ll charge you more for premiums if you have some of those conditions… They’re making money in either case.”

Health insurers should be “held to a higher standard” Boyd and colleagues argue before presenting two means of achieving that loftier standing. Insurance companies can either “divest themselves of holdings in fast food companies as well as other industries that have a clearly negative health impact,” they suggest, or they can use their ownership as leverage to force fast-food chains to adopt “practices consistent with widely accepted public healthy principles.”

The researchers concede that there are a few logical explanations for why health insurance providers might hold fast-food stock—to offset financial liability “associated with their policyholders consuming fast food,” due to a lack of understanding of the potential negative public health impact of excessive fast food consumption, or even simply due to a lack of communication between departments. Yet none of these explanations let the insurers of the hook, they argue. “If insurers are to play a greater part in the health care delivery system they ought to be held to a higher standard of corporate responsibility,” they write. “This responsibility includes aligning all o their resources—including financial investments—in ways that improve health or, at the very least, do not harm it.”

Read more: http://wellness.blogs.time.com/2010/04/16/calling-on-health-insurers-to-drop-fast-food-stock/#ixzz0lI4RGu3Z

Dr. Court’s Comments

This is an obvious conflict of interest.  It is also another reason health premiums are so expensive.  The health insurance industry is helping fund the very industry that is making people sick!  It’s outrageous.

These are the very same companies that will charge higher premiums if you gain weight or cancel your policy if you cost them too much money.

Just the other day I had a patient come in and tell me she had been dropped by her insurance company because she had “reached her lifetime cap” in terms of spending.  That cap by the way was $1 million.  This was and continues to be a very sick woman, but the insurance company does not care.  All they know is that she is costing them too much money.

Apparently these insurance companies see nothing wrong with investing in fast food though.  Why don’t they invest in tobacco companies too?  There really is no difference.  A lifetime of smoking is not any worse for you than a lifetime of eating fast food.

There are plenty of other ways to invest the large amounts of money that insurance companies make every year.  Investing that money in fast food companies only makes your premiums higher.  It’s like the local police force supplying the drug dealers with cash. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

The insurance company will be the first to raise your premiums for eating at fast food chains.  Of course they don’t know when you actually eat there, but they do require you to have regular physicals.  If your cholesterol goes up, if your weight increases or any other health marker changes negatively, you can expect an increase in the amount of money you pay them.  They’ll turn around and invest that money back into the very problem that is plaguing society.

Fast food companies will say that their food can be eaten as part of a healthy diet. I do not agree and their marketing is designed to get you to eat at their chain as often as possible.  They’d like nothing more than for you to eat every meal at their restaurant.  However, doing this is extremely detrimental to your health.

Obesity costs this country billions each year.  The insurance companies make billions off high premiums and denying care at every turn possible.  With their profits they invest irresponsibly in companies that are playing a significant roll in the  high cost of health care in this country.  In my opinion this should be illegal.

They have the right to invest their money, don’t get me wrong.  They should be investing it in areas that improve health, not destroy it.

Shocking Sugar Content of Common Foods!

The sugar content of foods is often a mystery to many people.  I too am often surprised at the sugar content of many foods.  I stumbled upon this today on another blog and thought it would be a great thing to repost.  (Click here for the original post.)

Sugar Content of Common Foods

1. Krispy Kreme original glazed doughnuts………………………………10 g
2. Luna Bar berry almond …………… ………………………………………11 g
3. Froot Loops breakfast cereal 3/4 cup …………………………………12 g
4. Ben & Jerry’s vanilla ice cream …………………………………………..16 g
5. Starbucks caffè latte grande 16 oz ……………………………………..17 g
6. Godiva 2 truffles …………………………………………………………….17 g
7. Subway 6″ sweet onion teriyaki chicken sandwich……………….17 g
8. Ms. Field’s chocolate chip cookie ………………………………….19 g
9. Tropicana 100% orange juice 8 oz ………………………………………25 g
10. Yoplait original yogurt …………………………………………………27 g
11. Craisins dried cranberries 1/3 cup ……………………………………….29 g
12. Vitamin Water 20 oz bottle …………………………………………….33 g
13. Oscar Mayer Lunchables crackers, turkey & American cheese ….36 g
14. Coca-Cola Classic 12 oz can ………………………………………………39 g
15. Sprinkles Cupcake red velvet …………………………………………….45 g
16. California Pizza Kitchen Thai chicken salad ………………………….45 g
17. Jamba Juice blackberry bliss 16 oz ………………………………………….49 g
18. Odwalla SuperFood 450 ml bottle …………………………………………..50 g
19. Starbucks caffe vanilla frappuccino grande 16 oz ………………………58 g

Dr. Court’s Comments

There are some observations I want to make about these foods.

First, remember this formula: 5 grams of sugar is equal to 1 tsp of sugar in the blood.  That is, for every 5 grams of sugar consumed it is equal to ingesting 1 tsp. of sugar.

Second, people often consider doughnuts to be extremely unhealthy.  Don’t get me wrong – they are, but consider that fruit loops have more sugar.  There is little more value in eating fruit loops for breakfast than in eating a doughnut.  The only added value I see is some fortified vitamins.  What if the doughnut was fortified?  Would you feed it to your child for breakfast?  I hope not.  If you wouldn’t, then why give them fruit loops?

Third, Oscar Mayer Lunchables are not really any better than a 12 ounce can of Coca-Cola.  If you use our formula from above, the Lunchables meal is roughly equal to consuming 7 tsp. of sugar.  The biggest problem I have is that these Lunchable meals are marketed as a healthy option to parents and as a fun way to eat a meal to kids.  They may be fun, but they are not healthy.

Fourth,Vitamin Water has always been a pet peeve of mine.  People routinely ask me if that’s o.k. to drink.  Their marketing has clearly worked.  You’ve seen the ads – Naomi Campbell (the super model) is dancing around and drinking it.  The name is pure marketing genius as well.  It suggests that it’s good for you, but as we see it has only slightly less sugar than a soda!

Fifth, the salads that you get at chain restaurants are not a healthy option.  They are generally loaded with carbohydrates.  If you want to eat a healthy salad make it at home or go to a restaurant that has a salad bar with fresh options.  Don’t use sugary salad dressings either.  Season salads to taste with salt and pepper (or other spices that you like) and add extra virgin olive oil and balsamic vinegar.  It’s a delicious, fresh taste!

Lastly, Starbucks is a major contributor to the obesity epidemic in this country.  One Starbucks caffe vanilla frappuccino has significantly more sugar in it than a soda does.  People routinely drink one or more of these every single day.  Just because it’s coffee (sort of) doesn’t mean it’s o.k.

People are generally not aware of the empty calories they are consuming every day.  These are often in the form of refined carbohydrates which is a significant contributor to heart disease, diabetes and cancer in this country.  The above list is just a small list.  Consider what your eating before you eat it.  Get educated about these things so you can be healthy and live a long, happy life!

Refined Carbs Boost Heart Disease in Women

A new study conducted in Italy showed that women who ate more processed carbohydrates such as rice, white bread

High glycemic foods cause a sharp rise and fall of blood sugar (and insulin). This makes it difficult to regulate appetite, weight and many other health factors.

and pizza have 2.25 times the risk of developing heart disease.

Interestingly enough, this trend was not seen in the men involved in the study.

The study lead by Sabina Sieri of the Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, a national institute for cancer research in Milan, Italy analyzed data from a large, ongoing study of nutrition and cancer risk. The researchers surveyed roughly 48,000 Italian adults about their diets in detail, noting the amount and types of carbohydrates they consumed on a regular basis. (People with diabetes, who have abnormal levels of blood sugar and insulin, were excluded.) Not surprisingly — the study was conducted in Italy, after all — bread, pasta, and pizza were common sources of carbs.

They found that high glycemic foods were highly associated with heart disease in women.  The glycemic index of a food measures the affect it has on blood sugar and, therefore, insulin.  A food with a high glycemic index causes a very rapid and steep spike in blood sugar and insulin and a low glycemic food causes a slow, more gradual effect.

Glycemic Scores

The glycemic index ranks the food with a numeric scale.  It ranks on a scale from 1 to 100 how quickly (or slowly) carbohydrates affect your blood-sugar levels. (White bread scores 100.) Foods that rank below 55 are considered to have a low glycemic index and produce only small fluctuations in blood glucose and insulin levels; foods that rank above 70 are said to have a high glycemic index and tend to cause unhealthy spikes in blood sugar. Along with these spikes of blood sugar come spikes in insulin as well.

This study followed participants for a span of 8 years and found a relationship of refined carbohydrates and heart disease in women but not men.  Why?  I have a couple of theories.

Why Didn’t It Affect Men?

It is known that refined carbohydrates lower HDL levels (good cholesterol) and raises blood fats called triglycerides.  It is also known that this occurs slower it men than it does in women.  It is likely that the period in which they followed the participants was not long enough to produce heart disease in men.  I suspect if this was a 25 or 30 year study we would see similar rates of heart disease in women and men attributed to refined carbohydrates.

Secondly, men have significantly higher muscle mass than women do.  Why is this important?  This muscle mass serves as a reservoir for sugar in the body.  It stores sugar in the form of glycogen for use later.  It does not store days worth of energy, more like hours.  However, it may be enough to offset the effects of higher glycemic foods over shorter periods of time.  This effect, however, is likely minimal over intervals of time like 25 or 30 years.  Eight years is probably not enough time to offset this advantage that men have.

High GI foods are known to be detrimental to health.  Documented studies have shown that high GI foods increase the risk of several chronic diseases including diabetes, heart disease, and certain cancers.

If you’ve read this blog before you know that I am not a huge proponent of carbohydrates.  I believe that they should be a smaller portion of the human diet and that when they are consumed, they should be of the low glycemic variety.

What are the benefits of low GI carbs?

• Low GI diets help people lose and manage weight
• Low GI diets increase the body’s sensitivity to insulin
• Low GI carbs improve diabetes management
• Low GI carbs reduce the risk of heart disease
• Low GI carbs improve blood cholesterol levels
• Low GI carbs can help you manage the symptoms of PCOS
• Low GI carbs reduce hunger and keep you fuller for longer
• Low GI carbs prolong physical endurance

What are examples of low glycemic foods to consume?

• Ezekiel Bread
• Lentils
• Raw Apples
• Quinoa
• Barley
• Chickpeas
• Grapefruit
• Couscous
• Raw milk
• Sweet potato

The above list is, of course, not all encompassing.  There are many more foods that fit in this category.  I always recommend, however, that my patients never make any of the above their entire meal.  It should be roughly 30%-40% of their meal.  The remaining calories should be from protein and healthy fats.

Keeping your carbohydrates low in the diet is the best way to stay healthy.  Study after study continues to confirm this.  If you are looking to lose weight and improve your health you should go after those carbs and get the high glycemic ones out!  You may leave the low GI carbs in, but always in balance with protein and healthy fats.

Statistics on Soft Drinks – You’ll be amazed!

Dr. Court’s Comments

Some of the stats above are just for fun, but they are interesting.  The ones I think we should all pay attention to are the ones that relate to our health.  Many of you reading this know that soda is bad for you, but seeing just how many liters the average American consumes in soda per year is truly astounding.

According to this, 216 liters are consumed every year by the average person in the United States.  Japan drinks a tenth of that much!  Is it surprising that Japan has the longest life expectancy in the world?

Let’s give you a little perspective on just how much 216 liters is.  It is exactly 57.06 gallons!  That is a lot of soda!  That’s 7,296 ounces of soda or roughly 20 ounces per day per person.

Now, also consider that this is an average.  That means it must take into account everyone, including the people who are not drinking any soda.  So for every person that’s not drinking any soda there is a person drinking at least 40 oz. per day to make up the difference.

I know that some of you reading this know that soda is extremely bad for your health and that you don’t drink any of the stuff.  That just goes to show you that there are plenty more people who regularly consume massive quantities of soda.

So why is soda so bad?  When you drink these sugary beverages, your blood sugar spikes almost immediately.  It spikes very high, too.  Your body responds by secreting high levels of insulin.  This forces your liver to begin the immediate process of turning all that extra sugar into fat.  It is the storage of this fat that, over time, becomes extremely detrimental to health.

It is a proven fact that sugar increases your insulin levels, which can lead to not only weight gain, but also high blood pressure, high cholesterol, heart disease, diabetes, premature aging and many more negative side effects.

People who are misinformed will point to the fact that soda is ‘fat free.’  True, it is fat free, but your body will convert that sugar to fat for storage.  The body does not get rid of that excess sugar because it sees it as energy that could be used at a later date.  People who consume large amounts of soda are setting themselves up to be overweight and under nourished.

The soda industry is a huge problem here in the US.  It causes so many health issues and drives up the cost of health care.  It does so by directly causing avoidable health issues such as diabetes, obesity and heart disease.  I recommend that my patients never drink soda.  In the rare occasion that they do have it, they should have a small amount.  By the way, I define ‘rare occasion’ as once or twice per year

1 in 100 Children have Autism…Find Out Why

My recent studies have focused very much on vitamin D and all of its wonderful benefits.  A quick perusal of the other articles on our blog will confirm this!  Recently, I came across information that was too good not to share with all of you.  A link between Autism and vitamin D deficiency has been established.  As some of you know, we see many children at The Vreeland Clinic for interventions with autism.  We provide nutritional and neurological rehabilitation programs to further assist in the development of the brains of these children.  In this article I would like to share with you groundbreaking information regarding vitamin D and autism.

Autism now affects 1 in 100 children in the U.S.

Autism statistics are staggering.  Twenty-five years ago an autism diagnosis was a 1 in 10,000 chance.  Today, 1 in 100 children will be diagnosed with autism.  Many researchers point to the increase in diagnosis as nothing more than more accurate methods and increased awareness.  They believe that the number was always about 1 in 100, but it was not reported.  Although there is some truth to more accurate diagnosis, it does not account for such a meteoric rise.  What’s more likely is that there has been some change in our environment over the last 20 to 25 years that, in combination with a more accurate system of diagnosis, has caused the number of autistic children to rise to epidemic proportions.

Autism involves poor social and verbal functioning accompanied by a host of other issues that range from poor digestion to fixed and repetitive behaviors.  Also included in the Autistic Spectrum Disorders is a series of problems with fine or gross motor control, all of which can have a devastating effect on a family.  The range is so broad in fact that many scientists and healthcare professionals often do not agree on a diagnosis.  What is presently known is that this condition can cause subtle developmental delays or profound issues that can require long-term care is specialized facilities.  The dichotomy is obvious, but there seems to be a link between the two.  This link is vitamin D.

There are many proposed causes of autism.  Most agree that there is some genetic predisposition.  This has been suggested because of the increased frequency of autism that tends to occur in families and in studies of identical twins.  Although there is a genetic link, it is also accepted that some environmental trigger must occur to cause autism.  The majority of scientists have come to a consensus that identifies both genetic and environmental factors as being relevant in the cause of autism.  Many theories have focused on environmental toxins, especially heavy metals, as a culprit in autism.  Another theory is low levels of vitamin D during pregnancy and infancy.

Many times when speaking about autism people are very confused by the recent rise in autism diagnoses.  Most times,

A link between Autism and vitamin D deficiency has been found

people rightly point out that a purely genetic theory makes no sense because our genes certainly are not any different than they were 20 years ago.  They also make the point that our environment, while different, is not significantly different than it was 20 years ago.  If both of these previous statements are true, and I believe they are, then what could possibly be causing the rise in the diagnosis of autism?  Dr. John Cannell, a leading researcher in vitamin D has a theory.  He agrees that genetically we are the same today as we were 20 years ago and that the environment, while altered, is not so significantly altered to cause an epidemic of autism.  He argues that our behavior with regard to our environment has changed.  He states that these changes have had an effect on our nervous systems that can and does account for a rapid rise in autism diagnoses.

Our understanding of what vitamin D does in our body has exploded in recent years.  Although most physicians know that vitamin D is critical for healthy bones, most do not know about its other benefits.  Vitamin D is critical for a healthy heart.  It has been shown that it is critical in preventing many forms of cancer.  We know that it regulates the immune system by keeping it prepared but also keeping it from overreacting.  Vitamin D is a potent anti-inflammatory.  It has also been shown that the active form of vitamin D, called calcitriol, is an important neurosteroid hormone.  A neurosteroid hormone is a compound that is extremely important for brain development and behavior.  Calcitriol is a potent neurosteroid that controls brain cell growth and acts on brain cells from the time of conception.  Recent research has suggested that vitamin D offers “neuroprotection, antiepileptic effects [antiseizure effects], immunomodulation, impact on several brain neurotransmitter systems and hormones as well as regulation of behaviors.”  The last statement makes it very obvious that vitamin D is critical for pregnant mothers, newborns and children alike.

The question remains, however.  What could have possibly changed so greatly in the past 20 years that it would account for the rapid rise in autistic cases?  Dr. Cannell believes it is a simple answer.  He believes that in an effort to reduce our risk for skin cancer we have created a very serious deficiency in vitamin D.  Remember, it is through the sun’s UV rays that most of our vitamin D is produced in the body.  By lathering up with sunscreen every time we go out side, we block those UV rays from ever reaching our skin, thus preventing synthesis of the all important vitamin D.  Dr. Cannell also believes that because we have become a much more sedentary society that we do not get outside nearly as much as we used to.  And is this so hard to believe?  Twenty years ago marks the real beginning of home video game systems.  Cable television was still in its infancy 20 years ago.  The iPod did not exist and hand held electronic games were not nearly as popular and complex as they are today.  So this, in combination with sunscreen, creates a dangerous, yet easily overlooked scenario.

Our unfounded fear of the sun has lead to an epidemic of low vitamin D levels - even in sunny climates.

So what evidence links autism with vitamin D deficiency?  Is it more that just a coincidence?  Calcitriol acts as a molecular switch in brain tissue that turns on favorable genes that facilitate brain development.  In fact, there are about 1,000 genes already known that are targets of calcitriol.  Vitamin D is unique in that is it the only vitamin that relies on the sun for its production rather than dietary intake.  Because pregnant women are getting into the sun less and less they require more and more to be taken orally.  Unfortunately, the prenatal vitamins that most women take are far too low in vitamin D to be of any benefit.  From an evolutionary perspective, our bodies are not used to getting the majority of our vitamin D from a pill.  It is used to getting massive amount from the sun.  The skin’s production of vitamin D is far more effective than ingesting it orally.  Take the following into consideration; in just 10-40 minutes of sunbathing by a fair skinned adult about 20,000 IUs of vitamin D will be produced over the next 24 hours.  It is important to note that the FDA claims 400 IUs per day through diet is sufficient for health.  There is quite a difference between 20,000 and 400.  Now consider this; in order to get 20,000 IUs from diet, one would have to drink 200 glasses of milk or take 50 prenatal multivitamins.  Obviously neither of those is a viable option.

Dr. Cannell points out that people have been avoiding the sun for the past 20 years.  It is exactly in the last 20 years that we have noticed a rapid rise in the diagnosis of autism.  Now, just because the rise in autism parallels a decrease in sun exposure in industrialized nations does not necessarily mean it is a cause and effect relationship.  There are other astounding biochemical reasons this theory makes sense.  A very large amount of animal studies have shown just how crucial calcitriol is to brain health.  In rats, it has been shown that the offspring of vitamin D deficient mothers had abnormal cell growth, structure and functions in their brains and alterations in learning and memory.  A group of French researchers found that 36 important brain proteins are disrupted when vitamin D is deficient during fetal development.  We discussed earlier that vitamin D is a potent anti-inflammatory.  Often in autism, children have problems with immune function similar to those affected by vitamin D – including increased inflammatory cytokine levels.  These high levels of inflammatory cytokines cause oxidative stress in the brain and are known to cause cognitive impairment.  Vitamin D reduces this oxidative stress on the brain.  Calcitriol also helps increase levels of glutathione in the brain.  Glutathione is a critical antioxidant for detoxification.  This may explain the link between heavy metals and autism.  Without the calcitriol, children cannot actively detoxify the small amounts of heavy metals that accumulate in their body on a daily basis.  In time, this results in a toxic load that retards brain development.  As we can see, there are many reasons why vitamin D is important for proper brain function.  It serves to regulate nerve cell growth, it regulates protein structure, it regulates the immune system and it regulates oxidative stress that may damage brain cells.

So now the question is, how much vitamin D do I need?  This is a good question.  Most people cannot obtain enough vitamin D through diet.  Ideally, a good blood level of vitamin D is 50-60 ng/mL.  This can be measured through a simple test.  In order to get to that number most people will have to supplement their diet with a quality form of vitamin D.  Generally speaking, we start adults on at least 2,000 – 4,000 IUs per day and recheck the levels in 2-3 months.  Recent research indicates that even that might not be enough (remember we are told the standard for Americans for adequate health is 400 IUs).  Children over 1 year of age can safely take at least 1,000 IUs but we usually start at 800 IUs and check the levels in 2-3 months.  Vitamin D is very safe to take and as a matter of fact, the risk of not having enough far out weighs the risk of vitamin D toxicity.  In fact, if vitamin D is taken responsibly, the risk of toxicity is virtually zero.  Should you have any questions regarding vitamin D supplementation, please contact you health care professional and talk to them about vitamin D.