by Vic Shayne, PhD

More than ever people are asking whether this food or that contains gluten. The reason? Gluten intolerance may be on the rise according to scientific reports, but it is my opinion that more and more people are merely discovering that gluten injures their health. Symptoms that people have merely lived with, such as strange rashes and intestinal cramps, are now being linked to gluten intolerance. I wonder whether the incidences of gluten intolerance are rising or just the numbers of people having realizations about what gluten does to them.

The only way to know for certain is to stop eating all gluten products (wheat, rolls, bread, cake, cookies, breaded chicken, etc.; you have to read labels closely).

A recent report from Mayo Clinic states that celiac disease is four times as prevalent as it was fifty years ago. Is this because people are eating more refined foods and wheat, or does it suggest an evolutionary problem? I doubt it’s the latter. We just don’t evolve that quickly.

“Celiac disease has become much more common in the last 50 years, and we don’t know why,” says Joseph Murray, M.D., the Mayo Clinic gastroenterologist who led the study. “It now affects about one in a hundred people. We also have shown that undiagnosed or ’silent’ celiac disease may have a significant impact on survival. The increasing prevalence, combined with the mortality impact, suggests celiac disease could be a significant public health issue.”

“In patients with celiac disease, the presence of a protein called gluten from wheat, barley or rye triggers an immune system attack, damaging the villi in the small intestine. Villi are fingerlike projections that increase the intestine’s surface area for nutrient absorption. Celiac disease symptoms may include diarrhea, abdominal discomfort, weight loss, anemia, unexplained infertility, loss of teeth or even premature or severe osteoporosis.”

Remember, though, that you don’t have to be diagnosed with celiac disease to be gluten intolerance. There is a wide range of reactions to gluten, ranging from debilitating bowel problems to a mild chronic itch.

If you have a gluten intolerance it can, and often does, lead to allergies that may seem unrelated to what you’re eating. But in this case, what’s happening is that gluten is hampering your immune system.

The best solution is to avoid gluten completely. You can’t just eat a little here and there. It has to be a complete withdrawal in the same way that an alcoholic can’t touch ANY alcohol again. It may take a year for your intestines to recover from the assault of gluten, so if you eat it here and there, your body will not be able to recover and you’ll forever wonder where your symptoms are coming from.

In the meanwhile, good supplements to take include: Immune Support, Fish Oils, CalMag Balance and Cell Power.

Related Articles:

• Gluten Free Cookies: Must be Nuts!
• Nutritious Cereal Grasses Without Gluten
• Mouth Sores Driving You Crazy?

“High blood glucose levels are one of the most common killers of Americans, according to new research from Harvard researchers. In a study that assessed 12 dietary, lifestyle and metabolic factors risk factors in causes of preventable death, high blood glucose levels came out as the fifth most deadly killer, after tobacco, high blood pressure, overweight/obesity, physical inactivity.

“High blood glucose levels were more perilous than high LDL cholesterol, high levels of dietary salt, low omega-3 levels, high levels of trans fatty acids, alcohol use, low levels of fruit and vegetables and low levels of polyunsaturated fatty acids.
“According to the mathematical model used by the researchers, there were between 163,000 and 217,000 high blood glucose-related mortalities in 2005 that could have been avoided.”1

When it comes to sugar consumption, Americans eat their weight’s worth every single year (about 140 pounds worth!). “Over time, it is believed that the pancreas just can’t keep up with the need for increased insulin and the individual develops diabetes. Reversing insulin resistance through dietary means can greatly help maintain healthy blood sugar levels.”2

What can you do?
1. Take GTF Complex (helps block sugar uptake naturally, and takes some of the stress off your pancreas)
2. Get rid of refined sugar in your diet.
3. Eat more vegetables and good fats (Evening Primrose Oil, Fish Oils, Coconut Oil)

Sources:

1. Starling, Shane, “Blood glucose control ranks high in US death causes,” Jun-2009

2. Goodarz Danaei, Eric L Ding, Dariush Mozaffarian, Ben Taylor, Jurgen Rehm, Christopher J L Murray, Majid Ezzati, ‘The Preventable Causes of Death in the United States: Comparative Risk Assessment of Dietary, Lifestyle, and Metabolic Risk Factors’ Public Library of Science Medicine Journal, Vol. 6, April, 2009

Related Articles:

• No Related Post

…From Organic Consumers Assn. — The American Dietetic Association Buries Organic Nutrition Facts

The American Dietetic Association (ADA) is the world’s largest organization of food and nutrition professionals. Its opinions influence health care professionals, the media, and state and federal policies. While ADA claims it is committed to “improving the nation’s health and advancing the profession of dietetics through research, education and advocacy,” its perspective is clearly being influenced by corporate agribusiness. Although the ADA has nothing to say about the abundance of scientific studies exposing the dangers of genetically engineered foods , the organization’s own Marianne Smith Edge has been giving anti-organic keynote addresses at meetings of state dietetic associations across the nation.

The ADA’s own studies in 2007 and 2009 revealed that plants cultivated in organic systems contain higher levels of nutrients, yet the ADA’s website claims, “nutritionally there is no evidence that organic produce is better or safer than conventionally grown produce.” It’s time to expose the ADA’s bias. Use OCA’s handy online tool to click and send a pre-written “letter to the editor” to your local media outlets.

Related Articles:

• Anti-Organic Statement so Slanted it Can Make You Sicker Than a Bag of DDT
• Is Cloned Animal Food Safe? Hogwash, says Organic Valley
• Can Organic Farming Save the World? Or is Poison Better?

Cranberry Sizzler

In honor of the cranberry, I thought I would make you my version of what I call the cranberry sizzler.  This high impact drink contains frozen cranberries and gives off a lot of attitude.  The tartness  of the cranberries really wake you up.

Use Organic Ingredients

• 1 Cup frozen cranberries
• 1/2 Cup Apple slices
• 1 Tbsp. Lemon Juice
• 1 Tbsp. Flax Seed
• 1/2 Cup Raspberries
• 1 Scoop of Protein Powder

Method

1. Add all ingredients to blender and mix until smooth
2. Pour into your favorite glass
3. ENJOY!

Zesty Tip: When blending frozen fruit it is best to put liquid at the bottom of the blender if possible to avoid the fruit from stopping the blender and getting stuck.  If you have a high powered blender you have nothing to worry about.

Related Articles:

• What Makes Hemp Good for Protein Drinks?

Deforestation causes 20% of the world’s global warming emissions. That’s more climate pollution than all of the world’s cars, trucks, trains, planes, and ships combined. The Brazilian cattle industry is responsible for 80% of deforestation in the Amazon, making it the largest single driver of deforestation in the world — and therefore the largest single driver of greenhouse gas emissions from deforestation in the world.

Brazil’s cattle industry is producing leather that could end up in popular shoe brands like Nike, Adidas, Reebok, and Timberland.

WATCH THIS VIDEO FROM GREENPEACE:

VISIT GREENPEACE HERE.

Related Articles:

• 4 Kitchen Tips Guaranteed to Save Your Money & Your Planet
• They’re Lying About Alternative Energy!!
• Uganda Guess Where the Coffee’s Going

Patients who undergo fractionated carbon dioxide laser treatment can expect a more even skin tone, as well as results that last years, not weeks or months.

ANN ARBOR, Mich.—When she looked in the mirror, 48-year-old Margaret Miglia didn’t like what she saw. To combat the fine lines and brown spots that began to appear on her face with age, she sought help at the University of Michigan Cosmetic Dermatology and Laser Center. There, she received a new, non-surgical skin resurfacing treatment using a fractionated carbon dioxide laser.

“Previous laser treatment for wrinkles and other textural issues like acne scarring used to create significant wounding,” says Jeffrey Orringer, M.D., director of the U-M Cosmetic Dermatology and Laser Center. “While results were terrific, the downtime for patients was substantial, and the risks were significant. Then, as technology improved, the pendulum swung the other way, providing lower risks, but with less pronounced results. This new treatment offers both improved results with much fewer side effects.”

In developing this new treatment method, traditional carbon dioxide lasers were modified into what is known as a fractional format. The carbon laser beam is broken into numerous microscopically thin beams that strike the skin and vaporize sun damaged or scarred tissue. This causes the skin to tighten, and during healing, produce collagen – the protein responsible for skin structure and appearance.

“The little micro-beams vaporize small columns of tissue that take about two to three days to seal back up,” Orringer says. “During that time, as the skin heals, the lost volume creates a tightening of the skin. In addition, around the columns of skin where the beam delivers heat, a very reproducible wound healing mechanism is created, which leads to the formation of new collagen in the skin.”

In addition to smoothing fine lines and wrinkles, Orringer says patients who undergo fractionated carbon dioxide laser treatment can expect a more even skin tone, as well as results that last years, not weeks or months.

“Collagen, the molecule that this procedure is trying to get the body to produce, has a half life of about 15 years. We would expect that, to the extent that patients’ improvement is based on collagen production, their results would last a very long time,” he says.

Miglia couldn’t be happier.

“I had the procedure done two and a half weeks ago and I love it. The experience for me was not really painful at all. It was more like a really bad sun burn. My skin is smooth. The brown spots on my face are gone,” she says. “It makes me feel much younger. It just feels good to look in the mirror.”

Treatment

The procedure takes 45 to 90 minutes. Patients will arrive an hour in advance of their appointment. A topical anesthetic cream is applied to the area being treated and allowed to soak in for an hour.

Patients are then given tiny injections of lidocaine to additionally numb the most sensitive parts of the face.

To ensure wrinkles are eliminated as close to the eyes as possible, patients are given protective eye shields so the laser can be applied to the skin up to the eyelash line.

“Patients are generally treated in two passes. The first pass acts very deeply on the skin, working on deeper lines, atrophic scars and the like,” Orringer says. “The second, more superficial pass, typically focuses more on blending skin tones and getting rid of sun spots and uneven pigmentation.”

Recovery and results

While the immediate effects of laser treatment include redness, swelling and oozing of clear fluids called serum, initial healing  occurs within three to four days. The serum, which contains proteins that help the skin to heal, continues to seep out onto the surface of the skin periodically during the first couple of days as the microscopic holes begin to seal off. By the third or fourth day there’s no wound care required other than applying a thick moisturizer, Orringer says. Redness gradually dissipates in about one or two weeks for most patients.

“Patients experience an immediate improvement during treatment associated with the laser heating their skin. The collagen contracts making the skin appear immediately tighter,” Orringer says. “Even better is the type of improvement related to collagen production that takes several weeks to a couple of months to fully appear. Patients will continue to see improvements in their skin for the first three to four months following treatment.”

Risks

As with any surgical procedure or medical treatment, there are risks. For fractionated carbon dioxide laser treatment, Orringer says the risks are fairly small. “Concerns like infection, scarring or discoloration of the skin are certainly theoretical possibilities, and it is something that patients should discuss with their treating physician,” he says.

For those who are considering undergoing fractionated carbon laser treatment, Orringer stresses that they should consider the setting in which they intend to undergo the procedure.

“Who will be performing the treatment? Which exact device will be used? And, especially, what is the training level of the team that’s going to be doing the procedure?” he says. “Regulation of laser use varies widely from state-to-state. This is a moderately invasive procedure that in some places is legally performed by non-medical personnel. Though the treatment is very safe when performed by experienced doctors, complications may occur. Patients should seek out a physician with specialized training in laser therapy.”

Resources:

U-M Cosmetic Dermatology and laser Center: www.med.umich.edu/cdlc/.

Related Articles:

• Medical Treatment is Third Leading Cause of Death
• Interest in Natural Health Goes UP as Economy Goes Down
• Nutrients That Hold Your Cells Together

Americans are spending billions of dollars to find out how they can lose weight. That’s a lot of money, but the most ironic thing is that all this obsession over HOW to lose weight is met with the SAD FACT that the United States is AN OBESE COUNTRY.  USA Today reports that 20% of preschoolers are obese. That’s one in five children who are only four years old. MSNBC reports:

The number of obese American adults outweighs the number of those who are merely overweight, according to the latest statistics from the federal government. Numbers posted by the National Center for Health Statistics show that more than 34 percent of Americans are obese, compared to 32.7 percent who are overweight. It said just under 6 percent are “extremely” obese. More than one-third of adults, or over 72 million people, were obese in 2005-2006, the NCHS said in its report.

Researchers at the University of California San Diego School of Medicine and San Diego State University say that a lack of physical activity was the most significant risk factor contributing to obesity in 11- to 15-year-olds.

So how can it be that we as a nation are so diet-conscious while at the same time so miserably overweight? My hunch is that the problem lies anywhere in between these facts:

1. People gain weight then lose it and then gain it, so they become lifetime customers of the swelling (pardon the pun) weight loss industry.
2. Obesity continues to go up, creating an ever-new source of weight loss industry business and customer base.
3. People are more weight conscious than they are health-conscious. It’s an image thing and not a health issue.
4. It’s easier (so it is rationalized) to cycle in and out of weight loss than stay on a steady, healthy course.
5. People are addicted to bad foods.
6. People are less and less physically active.
7. Our federal government allows makers of bad, sickening food to advertise as if they are offering something worth eating

If you want to lose weight, remember these FIVE FACTS first and you’ll be on your way to success:

1. Eat fewer calories (if you eat less, you’ll burn more)
2. Exercise daily: an activity that keeps up your heartbeat and respiration.
3. Eat fewer carbohydrates because carbs that are not used are stored as sugar and fat.
4. Think about health first, weight second.

Related Articles:

• Overweight? Try This for Three Weeks
• Five Ways to Reduce Weight
• Want to Lose Weight? Start the Day with a Protein Shake.

Every once in a while a new “report” comes out saying organic foods may be no better than non-organic. Really? So it’s better to eat pesticides and chemicals? Is this really a believable position? Personally, I’d rather not consume pesticides and other toxic chemicals from a variety of sources and let them enter my bloodstream and internal organs. This goes against any semblance of logic.

It’s also rather tedious to continually hear reports by dietitians working for medical centers speaking off the tops of their heads without any proof or substantiation. Go to the dietitian’s website and see who their financial backers are and you’ll get an idea why they are so down on organics. It’s beyond obvious. Certainly, not all dietitians subscribe to the political bias shown by the American Dietetic Association. Consider their corporate sponsors by going to their website. When dietitians like the person cited below come up with anti-organics statements, it’s more than suspicious to the logical mind.

Consider this load of nonsense (note that there are no studies cited):

“Organic foods are grown without the use of chemical fertilizer or pesticides and have not been processed using irradiation or added hormones,” says Ashley Mullins, R.D., L.D., CNSC, a registered dietitian at Baylor All Saints Medical Center. “As with any product, it’s important to check the label to determine exactly what you’re getting.” Products labeled “100 percent organic” must contain only organic ingredients with the exception of water and salt, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Products labeled “organic” must contain at least 95 percent organic ingredients. Products that are made with at least 70 percent organic ingredients are allowed to be labeled “made with organic ingredients.”

The Bottom Line While organic food can cost up to two or three times that of regular foods, it may not be any better for you, Mullins says.
“From a nutrition standpoint, there isn’t enough research to show that organic foods are more nutritious than regular foods. The levels of pesticides currently used haven’t been found to be harmful,” she says. “Of course, there may be other benefits to buying organic, such as it being more environmentally friendly and, in some cases, fresher.”

It really comes down to personal preference and budget, adds Mullins. [No, it comes down to whether you want toxins poisoning your body and your children's bodies and the planet]. Whatever you do, don’t let your choice inhibit your ability to get the nutrients you need. “The most important thing to consider is the health benefit of consuming five servings of fruits and vegetables every day—whether or not they’re organic,” says Mullins. “That’s the biggest payoff.” (Is Organic Overrated? ScienceDaily, May 23, 2009)

AND NOW FOR THE FACTS:

After £12M and four years of study, it has been announced that organic fruit, vegetables and milk are more nutritious than non-organically produced. They may also contain higher concentrations of antioxidants which ward off cancer and heart disease.Apparently, “the health benefits were so striking that moving to organic food was the equivalent of eating an extra portion of fruit and vegetables every day.”

Researchers on the European Union study grew both organic and regular fruit and vegetables side by side on a site in Northumberland and compared factors such as nutritional quality. Produce compared included cabbages, lettuces, carrots, potatoes and wheat. The early results of the study carried out by Newcastle University show that organic fruit and vegetables have up to 40 per cent more antioxidants than non-organically grown produce. Also found in greater quantities in organic produce were vitamin C, and trace elements such as iron, copper and zinc. Even greater contrasts were found for milk, with organic milk containing between 50% and 80% more antioxidants and healthy fatty acids. The Food Standards Agency has so far refused to acknowledge any benefits of eating organic, but have now said that they will review the evidence.

The Real Bottom line: If you are logical and intelligent then it doesn’t take much to come to the conclusion that manmade poisons do not belong in your body, and that food should not be irradiated or altered in any other way from its natural state.  Further, not all organic food costs two to three times more than nonorganic food. This nation has serious health problems that parallel the introduction of chemical farming. Cancer and other diseases have risen. The cumulative load of eating a diet full of chemicals toxic enough to kill bugs will certainly adversely affect your body. The last point to consider certainly shows that the above-cited dietitian is out of touch with reality. Why? Because she somehow fails to realize that if something is poisonous to the environment than it is also poisonous to us humans who are dependent on the environment. How can non organic be bad for the environment but good for you to eat?

Related Articles:

• Dietitians Association DOWN on Organics, But Sponsored by Corporate Health Offenders
• Is Cloned Animal Food Safe? Hogwash, says Organic Valley
• Can Organic Farming Save the World? Or is Poison Better?

What came first, the egg or the barage of negative press about them? The latter. Eggs have long been a source of food for man and beast alike. But over the past few decades eggs have been beaten, whipped, fried and boiled over comments that they may provide a health risk. But before delving into this yellow topic, here’s one item of truth: Factory farmed eggs are bad for you because they contain drug residues, pesticides, hormones and other chemicals. Plus, chickens are treated inhumanely at these factories to such a degree that if you saw your neighbor treating his pet in the same way, you’d call the police without hesitation! It’s worse than brutal, it’s psychopathic. Now for the health of the matter…

Who is down on eggs? It seems to be the same people who are down on other fats despite the fact that fats are essential to human life, health and healing. The truth is that BAD fats are bad for you, but GOOD fats are essential. Eggs fall into the good fat category. Much of the slandering of fat foods is politically motivated.

The Weston A. Price Foundation reports:

Research on the current plague of heart disease and cancer has focused on dietary fats. Modern diet gurus assert that the Standard American Diet has become “richer” during the middle decades of the 20th century. “. . . we have gradually increased our intake of butter, milk, other dairy products and eggs. The proportion of calories from fats has increased from a national figure of 30 per cent in 1910 to over 40 percent [in 1966]. . . ” writes Jeremiah Stamler, M.D., in a little volume called Your Heart Has Nine Lives. Stamler, a prolific writer and longtime member of the American Heart Association, has been promoting the “lipid hypothesis” for more than three decades. He has lived to see the entire American medical establishment fall in behind the theory that cancer and heart disease in America have been caused by the increased consumption of saturated fats and cholesterol from butter, cream, eggs and meat. The solution, he asserts, is to substitute polyunsaturated oils for traditional dairy fats and lard. (Your Heart Has Nine Lives was sponsored by the Corn Products Company, makers of Mazola margarine and corn oil.) (westonaprice.org)

Americans consume far too much of one kind of EFA (omega-6 EFAs found in most polyunsaturated vegetable oils) but not enough of another kind of EFA (omega-3 EFAs found in fish, fish oils, eggs from properly fed chickens, dark green vegetables and herbs, and oils from certain seeds such as flax and chia, nuts such as walnuts and in small amounts in all whole grains.) (Am J Clin Nutr 1991 54:438-63)

Clare M. Hasler, Ph.D,  University of Illinois, stated, “eggs have not traditionally been regarded as a functional food, primarily due to concerns about their adverse effects on serum cholesterol levels.” However, “it is now known that there is little if any connection between dietary cholesterol and blood cholesterol levels…” she states.

In addition, Dr. Hasler notes that “…it is now known that there is little if any connection between dietary cholesterol and blood cholesterol levels….eggs are an excellent dietary source of many essential (e.g., protein, choline) and non-essential (e.g., lutein/zeaxanthin) components which may promote optimal health.” (Nutritional Conference: Where Would We Be Without the Egg? A Conference About Nature’s Original Functional Food,”Amelia Island, Florida, February 25-27, 2000)

There are critics who claim that the big cholesterol scare has more to do with selling more cholesterol-lowering drugs (it’s a billion dollar market) than helping people choose the right foods.

Related Articles:

• What Harvard Says About Transfats & Heart Disease
• Eating Artichokes May Lower Your Cholesterol
• Saturated Fats & Cholesterol Not a Real Health Threat?

Astragalus is an herb that has grown in popularity as of recently, though it has been in use traditionally for thousands of years. It’s an ingredient within the whole food supplement CellPower and ImmuneSupport, both of which are used to support the immune system and energize the body.

Animal studies and preliminary human clinical studies suggest that astragalus may improve functioning of the immune system and might possibly enhance the effect of conventional immune therapy for some cancers. The scientific evidence for the ability of astragalus to enhance the immune system and fight diseases, including cancer and heart disease, comes mostly from laboratory and animal studies. Researchers at The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center found that astragalus extract enhanced the cell-destroying ability, or cytotoxicity, of the conventional immunotherapy treatment interleukin-2 by improving the immune system’s response. It also partly restored the immune function of cells in test tubes. Astragalus has also been found to reduce the length of colds and stimulate the production of interferons, a group of substances produced by the body as part of the normal defense mechanism against viral infections. — American Cancer Society

University of Michigan researchers state:

Astragalus contains numerous components, including flavonoids, polysaccharides, triterpene glycosides (e.g., astragalosides I-VII), amino acids, and trace minerals.3 Several preliminary clinical trials in China have suggested that astragalus can benefit immune function and improve survival in some people with cancer.4 Given the poor quality of these trials, it is difficult to know how useful astragalus really was. One Chinese trial also found that astragalus could decrease overactive immune function in people with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), an autoimmune disease.5 Further trials are needed, however, to know if astragalus is safe for people with SLE, or any other autoimmune disease.

A double-blind trial found that, in people undergoing dialysis for kidney failure, intravenous astragalus improved one facet of immune function compared to the immune function of untreated people.6 Further study is needed to determine if astragalus can help prevent infections in people undergoing dialysis. Early clinical trials in China suggest astragalus root might also benefit people with chronic viral hepatitis, though it may take one to two months to see results.7

In preliminary trials in China, astragalus has been used after people suffer heart attacks.8 More research is needed to determine whether astragalus is truly beneficial in this situation.

Astragalus has no known side effects when used as recommended.

Related Articles:

• Health Question: How Can I Build Up My Immune System?
• Seven Foods that Fuel Your Immune System
• Astralagus’ Potent Immune Benefits