Dr. MERCOLA --> alternative health and fitness

[DrJonescaptain of 1,000]

Is the EPA ruling on ozone based on solid science?

By Dr. Mercola

Under the Clean Air Act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for setting National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for various air pollutants, ozone included.

But their latest ruling on ozone is riddled in controversy, as opponents state it is not only unsupported by scientific evidence but also set to cost the United States dearly in the form of a trillion dollars and millions of lost jobs.

What's the New Ozone Standard All About?

In 2009, the EPA decided it would reconsider the ozone standard, which was set at 0.075 parts per million (ppm) in 2008. In 2010, they proposed a new standard in the range of 0.060 to 0.070 ppm, with an additional secondary "seasonal" (and even more stringent) standard designed to protect sensitive vegetation and ecosystems, including forests, parks, wildlife refuges and wilderness areas during the summer.

The final rule was released at the end of July 2011i after a temporary delay.At the time, opponents like Andrew Grossman, a frequent adviser to Congress on complex legal and policy issues, had rejoiced, statingii :

"Congress should make the EPA's temporary postponement of its new ozone standards a permanent one."

In the end, the EPA set the new ozone standard at 0.070 ppm. Why all the backlash over what seems on face value to be a positive move for health and the environment?

Questionable Science: Are Ozone Risks Exaggerated?

Most of you have probably heard of ozone before, likely in relation to its role as an air pollutant. But you should know that ozone is not inherently bad, nor dangerous. It is actually the way that nature cleans and removes pollutants naturally from the air outside.

Ozone is simply an oxygen molecule with an extra atom attached… the chemical symbol is O3… the extra oxygen atom makes it a somewhat aggressive oxidizer. Why is the extra oxygen atom important? The interesting thing about ozone is that it uses this extra ozone to decimate air pollution. Once it oxidizes an air pollutant, it loses one of its oxygen atoms and turns back into pure oxygen (O2).

It is true that ozone in excessively high levels can cause breathing trouble, but the part that is never mentioned is that you breathe ozone every day, and that's just fine. It's a normal part of your air supply, and a normal part of earth's atmosphere. It is only when ozone levels are excessive that health problems can occur. After all, even water and sunlight are harmful in excess.

Is the EPA's Ozone Standard Based on Flawed Science?

The EPA's suggested revision to the ozone NAAQS appears to be based on flawed science. As a report by NERA Economic Consulting revealed:

"EPA's statements on health benefits from lowering the Ozone NAAQS grossly misrepresent what EPA is actually estimating as the potential benefits of reducing public exposures to ozone. If based on ozone benefits alone, not one of EPA's estimates of the benefits of reducing ozone to a tighter alternative ozone standard is as large as the costs of attaining that respective ozone standard -- all cost more than the ozone benefits they might provide."

According to the report:

* The EPA has included ozone reduction benefits based on ozone-related mortality, even though EPA's science advisors found no "causal" link between ozone and mortality
* The EPA has included benefits from concomitant reductions in particulate matter (PM) that may occur while reducing ozone precursors. Particulate matter is an entirely different issue from ozone, and describes particles in the air, such as dust, dirt, soot, smoke and other toxins from diesel fumes and other sources.

As the report stated:

"The only way EPA finds benefits greater than costs for a tighter ozone standard is to add in health gains from concomitant reductions in PM2.5 that may occur while reducing ozone precursors -- "co-benefits" that have nothing to do with ozone exposures. Thus, EPA's claim that tightening the Ozone NAAQS has greater benefits than costs has nothing to do with reducing risks from ozone."

Grossman further expanded on the EPA's decision to include particulate matter in with their ozone analysis:

"The biggest purported benefits—alleged to be worth tens of billions of dollars per year—have to do not with ozone but with reductions in airborne particulate matter that would supposedly be achieved by the emissions controls required to meet a new ozone standard. This claim is speculative, because the "unknown technologies" necessary to comply may or may not achieve these reductions.

Moreover, the EPA claims these same benefits for its rule on interstate air pollution, its massively expensive Utility MACT proposal, and its NAAQS for fine particulate matter and sulfur dioxide. If a private entity followed the EPA's lead and quintuple-counted profits, its executives would wind up in prison."

There are other questionable aspects to the EPA's new NAAQS as well. For instance, the stricter standard is based on a controversial re-analysis of two small studies. As Grossman states:

"The EPA's re-analysis has proven controversial and been criticized by the two studies' author and other scientists. For example, CASAC [Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee] member Dr. Sverre Vedal of the University of Washington stated that the EPA's re-analysis "amounts to attempting to find effects in a very few individuals when the statistical tests are not significant." And former CASAC chair Roger McClellan testified, 'The validity of this re-interpretation and the significance of the functional changes is open to debate.'"

The standard is also moving closer to background levels that exist naturally in the environment, making it difficult if not possible to attain in some areas. The costs are going to be extraordinary no matter what, with one study by Manufacturers Alliance/MAPI suggesting the stricter ozone standard could cost the U.S. economy more than $1 trillion per year from 2020 to 2030 while cutting 7.3 million jobs.

Natural Ozone is Safe

Much of the misunderstanding surrounding ozone has been spewed by the commercial industry, including manufacturers of ozone-free air purifiers who have used negative marketing to their advantage, jumping on the ozone-will-kill-you bandwagon in an attempt to skewer the competition. But ozone is a natural component of the earth's atmosphere, considered by many scientists to be nature's method for cleaning the air we breathe.

Ozone is:

* Made in nature by ultra violet (UV) energy from the sun striking oxygen molecules
* Created by lightning – The fresh air you smell after a thunderstorm is due to the ozone cleaning effect on the air.
* A component of ground-level air wherever you go on the earth – Such has been the case since the beginning of time.

At the appropriate natural levels like you find outside on a non-polluted day, ozone is not only effective, it's naturally safe … typical levels run 0.01 to 0.05 ppm. This is why, when it comes to ozone air purifiers, as long as they limit ozone levels in your home to between 0.02 and 0.04 ppm, they offer great health benefits, without any of the negative effects.

Ozone Purifiers are Also Very Safe if Used Correctly

It is important to understand that air purifiers incorporating ozone use an active process and do not physically capture any indoor air pollutants. Rather they generate a safe dose of ozone that will oxidize and permanently remove the pollutants just the way they do outdoors in Mother Nature.

When it comes to air purification units for your home, the EPA has established clear ozone limits for occupied spaces … and that's 0.05 ppm. And this establishment by the EPA seems to make a great deal of sense since typical levels outdoors are present at 0.05 ppm and are still considered safe.

So there is no reason to be fearful of ozone, as it is safe at natural levels and actually used in nature to oxidize pollutants and clean the air.

You certainly do not want to expose yourself to high levels of man-made ozone, that is, the ozone the EPA calls "ground-level" ozone that is formed when two types of pollutants (volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of nitrogen) react in the presence of sunlight. This ozone is a direct product of industry, motor vehicles, and toxic consumer products like paints and cleaners, and may cause breathing trouble, lung damage and other health effects with continued exposure.

If ozone were not safe, you would not be able to breathe the air outside, especially on a clear sunny day; during a thunderstorm, lightning, or after a rain shower. The fact is, when used responsibly, ozone is very safe, just like oxygen, and is very beneficial to our planet and all living things on it.

If you are interested in an extensive reference of scientific articles about ozone's medical uses, refer to this list, compiled by Ed McCabe. And finally, if you are interested in making the air you breathe on a daily basis in your home and office cleaner, you can find 15 of my top strategies here.

References:

* i EPA Final National Ambient Air Quality Standard for Ozone, July 2011
* ii The Heritage Foundation August 1, 2011

[DrJonescaptain of 1,000]

Top health indicators you should know about -

By Dr. Mercola

The Globe and Maili recently published an article outlining "the 5 numbers that most impact your health."

I think they have the right idea, but but I disagree with their test selections.

If you really want to monitor your health, I believe the numbers you should be tracking are the seven listed in the table below.

These are far more important than tracking your total cholesterol, blood pressure, or BMI, as recommended by the Globe and Mail.

Let's take a closer look at these values and what they may reveal about your health.

1. Fasting Insulin (I)
2. Cholesterol/HDL Ratio (C)
3. Percentage Body Fat (F)
4. Serum Ferritin (F)
5. Waist/Hip Ratio (WH)
6. Uric Acid Level (U)
7. Vitamin D Level (D)

1. Fasting Insulin Level

Your fasting insulin level reflects how healthy your blood glucose levels are over time. Insulin helps sugar move from your blood into your cells, where it can be used or stored. Chronically elevated blood glucose leads to insulin resistance and numerous chronic diseases, including diabetes and heart disease. Elevated blood glucose and insulin resistance are epidemic today. An estimated one in four Americans are either insulin resistant or diabetic.

One of the most frequent causes of elevated glucose (and insulin resistance) is consumption of too many grains and sugars. Fructose has been shown to be especially harmful due to the way it disrupts the lock-and-key fit between insulin and its cellular receptor sites. Fructose is a powerful endocrine disruptor, capable of rapidly inducing insulin resistance when consumed in what, by today's standards, is a relatively small amount (25 grams or more per day).

Your fasting insulin level can be determined by a simple, inexpensive blood test. A normal fasting blood insulin level is below 5, but ideally you'll want it below 3. If your insulin level is higher than 3 to 5, the most effective way to optimize it is to reduce or eliminate all forms of dietary sugar, particularly fructose.

You can also use a simple glucose test to check your fasting glucose level. Just realize that it's possible to have low fasting glucose but still have significantly elevated insulin levels.Generally speaking, a fasting glucose under 100 mg/dl suggests you're not insulin resistant, while a level between 100 and 125 suggests you're either mildly insulin resistant or have impaired glucose tolerance (sometimes referred to as pre-diabetes).

2. Cholesterol/HDL Ratio

Cholesterol has been demonized for the past few decades, thanks to a landmark study by Dr. Ancel Keys in 1953 that has been used to justify a low fat diet approach to achieve health. This study resulted in cholesterol's being blamed for just about every case of heart disease in the last 20 years. But the fact is, cholesterol is most likely not going to destroy your health (as you have been led to believe), and is also not the cause of heart disease. Most of the recent credible science has debunked Keys' theory, but the cholesterol myth stubbornly persists in the mainstream because it's so deeply embedded in our culture.

We now know that your body actually requires cholesterol to manufacture vitamin D from sunlight, to synthesize sex hormones, and for proper brain function. Measuring total blood cholesterol tells you practically nothing about your heart disease risk. More value can be derived by looking at the relative types of lipids circulating in your bloodstream, and today we have sophisticated tests that can measure these. The following two ratios are far better indicators of heart disease risk than total cholesterol alone:

* Your HDL/Cholesterol ratio: HDL (high-density lipoproteins) to total cholesterol percentage is a very good predictor of heart disease risk. Just divide your HDL number by your total cholesterol. Ideally, this number should exceed 24 percent; below 10 percent predicts an increased risk for heart disease.
* Your Triglyceride/HDL ratio: Divide your triglyceride number by your HDL. This percentage should ideally be below 2.

3. Percentage Body Fat

Body composition, meaning your relative amounts of lean body mass to body fat, is a powerful way to measure your overall health. There is a strong correlation between higher body fat and negative health outcomes, such as heart disease and stroke. And percentage of body fat says more about your overall fitness than body weight or body mass index (BMI). BMI can be particularly misleading, causing fit bodybuilders to be classified as overweight as it does not take into account the higher weight of muscle compared to fat. Also, increased organ or abdominal adipose tissue in particular (a "beer belly") has been shown to be more strongly associated with heart disease and a variety of chronic diseases than just weight in relation to height.

The most common way to assess body fat percentage is the skinfold measurement technique, which utilizes a skinfold caliper. (Skinfold measurement is the method most widely used by fitness trainers.) The American Council on Exercise provides the following percentage body fat guidelinesii for men and women:
Category Women Men
Essential Fat 10-13% 2-5%
Athletes 14-20% 6-13%
Fitness 21-24% 4-17%
Acceptable 25-31% 18-24%
Obesity >32% >25%



For even greater accuracy, you can resort to hydrostatic weighing, where you get weighed under water. This measures the density of your body, which is then used to calculate how much body fat you have.

Another technique that is gaining support by medical and fitness experts is the bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA). To measure body impedance, an electrical signal is passed through your body. Impedance is greatest in fat tissue, which contains low amounts of water, while fat-free mass, which contains up to 75 percent water, allows the signal to pass through fairly unimpeded. This measurement, along with other factors such as your height, weight, and body type, is then used to calculate your percentage of body fat, fat-free mass and other body composition values.

There are now bathroom scales that use this technology. I picked one up from Eat Smartiii that I have been using for the last four months. I find it's a simple way to monitor my body fat percentage. It may overestimate a bit as it has me at 13.5 percent when I tested between 11 and 12 percent using other methods, but it is very accurate in measuring day to day variability, and can be an excellent and inexpensive way to monitor your progress on optimizing your body fat so it is line with your health goals.

4. Serum Ferritin

You probably already know that iron is an important nutrient for your body. But you might not be aware that iron is a double-edged sword—both too much and too little can lead to major health problems.

Iron serves many functions in your body, but one of the most important is carrying oxygen throughout your body by binding to hemoglobin molecules in your bloodstream. Without proper oxygenation, your cells quickly begin to die. If you don't have enough iron in your body, you end up with iron deficiency anemia, a common problem among children and menstruating women. But your body also has a limited capacity to excrete iron, so it can build up in your tissues if you're getting too much in your diet.

Processed foods fortified with iron and multivitamins with iron can contribute to iron overload over time. The problem with excess iron is that it's also a very potent oxidative stressor, causing dangerous free radicals that can damage your heart and your DNA, and lead to diseases such as cancer. Therefore, you should regularly check yourself for iron overload with a serum ferritin test. This blood test measures iron's carrier molecule—a protein called ferritin found inside your cells upon which the iron is stored. If your ferritin levels are low, it means your iron levels are also low, and vice versa. Use the following guidelines to interpret your serum ferritin level:

* The healthy range of serum ferritin is between 20 and 80 ng/ml
* The ideal serum ferritin range is 40 to 60 ng/ml
* Below 20, you are iron deficient; above 80, you have an iron surplus.Ferritin levels can go really high. I've seen levels over 1,000, but anything over 80 is likely to be a problem.

It is VITAL to appreciate that about one in five men and postmenopausal women have iron levels that are too high and are actually causing premature disease and death. If you or someone you love has triple digit ferritin levels you need to lower them ASAP. The higher the number the worse it is, with numbers over 250-300 being particularly dangerous. Fortunately there is a very simple way to lower it. I would not advise using supplements like phytic acid (IP6), which can bind other helpful minerals. The single best way to lower your iron is to simply donate blood. If you have risk factors that prevent you from having your blood accepted for donation, you can have your doctor write you a prescription for a therapeutic phlebotomy.

5. Waist Size

There is scientific evidenceiv that BMI (body mass index) is a very flawed measurement when it comes to predicting your risk of dying from heart disease. Waist size provides a far more accurate benchmark for predicting your risk of death from a heart attack and from other causes. Determining your waist size is easy. With a tape measure, measure the distance around the smallest area of your abdomen, below your rib cage and above your belly button. The following is a general guide for healthy waist circumference:

* Men: 37 to 40 inches is overweight; greater than 40 inches is obese
* Women: 31.5 to 34.6 inches is overweight; greater than 34.6 inches is obese

The reason why this is a better indicator of heart disease risk is because your waist size is related to the type of fat that is stored around your waistline, called "visceral fat" or "belly fat." This type of fat is strongly linked to type 2 diabetes, heart disease, stroke, and other chronic diseases. It is thought that visceral fat is related to the release of proteins and hormones that cause inflammation, which can in turn damage your arteries and affect how you metabolize sugars and fats. An expanded waistline is associated with insulin resistance, high blood pressure, lipid imbalance, cardiovascular disease, thickening of the walls of your heart, and even increased risk for developing Alzheimer's disease decades later.

6. Uric Acid Level

You may already know that elevated uric acid levels cause gout. But did you know uric acid can serve as a marker for fructose toxicity?

Fructose, when over-consumed, is very taxing to your body's metabolic processes. One of the by-products of fructose metabolism is uric acid, so when you consume too much sugar—particularly concentrated fructose—your uric acid levels may rise. Fructose turns you into a uric acid factory! Elevated uric acid is thought to explain much of the damage fructose causes in your body. This is especially pronounced if you are particularly fructose-sensitive, as I am. I'm grateful to Dr. Richard Johnson, author of The Sugar Fix, for bringing the uric acid link to my attention. As an aside I have helped proof his new book, The Fat Switch, which is beyond phenomenal and will also be available shortly.

The connection between fructose consumption and increased uric acid is so reliable that a uric acid level taken from your blood can actually be used as a marker for fructose toxicity. I now recommend that a uric acid level be a routine part of your blood screening.

According to the latest research, the safest range for uric acid is between 3 and 5.5 milligrams per deciliter, and there appears to be a steady relationship between uric acid levels and blood pressure and cardiovascular risk, even down to the range of 3 to 4 mg/dl. As you know, two-thirds of the U.S. population is overweight, and most of these people likely have uric acid levels in excess of 5.5. Some may even be closer to 10 or higher. Dr. Johnson suggests that the ideal uric acid level is probably around:

* 4 mg/dl for men, and
* 3.5 mg/dl for women

7. Vitamin D Level

Vitamin D deficiency is at epidemic levels in the United States, but many Americans—including many physicians—are still unaware of the implications. In the U.S., the late winter average vitamin D is only about 15 to 18 ng/ml, which is considered a very serious deficiency state. In fact, 85 percent of Americans may be deficient in vitamin D, including more than 95 percent of all seniors.

Vitamin D influences about 3,000 of the 30,000 genes in your body, which is why it's involved with the expression of so many diseases, from cancer to autism to heart disease and rheumatoid arthritis, just to name a few. A study by vitamin D expert Dr. William Grant, Ph.D., found that about 30 percent of cancer deaths could be prevented each year with higher levels of vitamin D. Beyond preventing cancer, researchers have estimated that increasing vitamin D levels could prevent diseases that claim nearly one million lives globally each year. Vitamin D also fights colds and flu because it helps your immune system defend against bacteria and viruses.

You should regularly check your vitamin D level, but you must obtain the correct test. There are two vitamin D tests: 1,25(OH)D and 25(OH)D. Of the two, 25(OH)D (also called 25-hydroxyvitamin D) is the better marker of overall vitamin D status.

The following ranges were obtained in a large-scale clinical study by evaluating healthy people in tropical or subtropical parts of the world, where they are receiving healthy sun exposures. It seems more than reasonable to assume that these values are in fact reflective of an optimal human requirement. When getting your vitamin D level tested, please realize that many commercial labs are using old, outdated reference ranges, and that their "normal" is likely to be far below these optimal and clinically relevant values.

vitamin d levels

(Holick MF. Calcium and Vitamin D. Diagnostics and Therapeutics. Clin Lab Med. 2000 Sep;20(3):569-90)

If your vitamin D level is too low, the best way to increase it is with exposure to natural sunlight, in appropriate amounts, or using a safe tanning bed. If neither of those options are feasible, you can opt for an oral vitamin D3 supplement. Just remember that if you supplement orally, it is even MORE important to have your blood levels checked regularly, as there is a wide variation in how efficiently people absorb vitamin D orally.

While the latest research indicates adults need about 8,000 IU's of vitamin D per day to achieve vitamin D levels of 40 ng/ml, you need to monitor your levels carefully in order to determine the dosage you need in order to reach and maintain optimal levels, as this is highly variable. There is no magic dosage when it comes to vitamin D; rather it's the serum level that really matters.

For more information about vitamin D testing, refer to my comprehensive article on the topic. I also strongly recommend you watch my one-hour vitamin D lecture, included at the top of this section.

References:

* i Globe and Mail January 5, 2012
* ii American Council on Exercise
* iii Amazon.com, EatSmart Precision GetFit Digital Body Fat Scale w/ 400 lb. Capacity & Auto Recognition Technology
* iv J Am CollCardiol May 10, 2011

[DrJonescaptain of 1,000]

What is causing honey bees to die off in large numbers?

By Dr. Mercola

Honey bees are the angels of agriculture, but they're disappearing at a startling rate in a mysterious phenomenon dubbed Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD).

Since 2007, North American honey bees are literally disappearing without a trace. There are no massive dead bee bodies appearing in or around the hives—the bees are simply GONE, bewildering beekeepers and scientists alike.

In fact, serious honey bee die-offs have been occurring around the world for the past decade. The U.S. and the U.K. both reported losing a third of their honey bees in 2010.

Italy lost half of theirs.

The die-offs have spread to China and India, in addition to many other countries. Environmental scientists are concerned that CCD reflects a far more serious problem than pollination—that it's an ominous sign of severe environmental crisis.

Bees provide pollination for crops, orchards and flowers, and make honey and wax for cosmetics, food and medicine. One of every three bites of food you eat depends on the honey bee. They pollinate at least 130 different crops in the U.S. alone, including fruits, vegetables and tree nuts.

Without honey bees, farmers would have to resort to pollinating their crops by hand.

According to a recent British report, replacing the pollination of food crops that bees do for free with hand pollination would cost the UK £1.8 billion per year. In the words of Michael Pollan:

"CCD is one of the signs--the unmistakable signs—that our food system is unsustainable… It's destroying the conditions upon which it depends. It has internal contradictions that will lead to breakdown."

The documentary film "Vanishing of the Bees" takes a piercing investigative look at the economic, political and ecological implications of the worldwide disappearance of the honey bee. Directors George Langworthy and Maryam Henein tell the story of Colony Collapse Disorder, as well as suggesting a platform of solutions. I strongly encourage you to watch this important film, which is being offered here in its entirety, FREE for a limited time.

Busy as a Bee

Honey bees represent one of the matriarchies of the insect kingdom. Colonies consist of one queen, lots and lots of male worker bees and a few male drones. Ninety-five percent of the worker bees are female. A healthy hive is occupied by a collection of overlapping generations. Tasks are divvied up according to age and colony needs via a very intricate system of communication:

* Younger worker bees (nurse bees) tend to the queen and the baby bees.
* Older worker bees forage for food and water for the colony, convert nectar into honey, construct wax cells and clean the cells, and guard the hive from invaders. Worker bees develop stingers to defend the eggs lain by the queen.
* Drones have only one purpose—to mate with the queen. In fact, the queen will leave her hive only once in her lifetime, in order to mate with several drones and store up enough sperm to last the rest of her life.i

Pollination is dependent on insects and the wind, and bees play an essential role. As they buzz around in flight, their hair develops static electricity. When a bee lands on a flower, this static charge attracts pollen to the bee like a magnet. Honey bees from one hive can visit more than 100,000 flowers in a single day—those bees really ARE busy!

Why are We Losing Our Bees?

Scientists have investigated a number of factors to help explain CCD and have offered a variety of explanations. The primary theory seems to be that Colony Collapse Disorder is caused by a variety of imbalances in the environment, secondary to current agricultural and industrial practices.

Bees are sensitive to the constant flood of manmade chemicals into their system, especially pesticides, many of which accumulate over time. Honey bee colonies are further stressed by the "factory farming" style of beekeeping employed by the commercial bee industry. They are being raised using unnatural practices, artificially inseminated, and fed cheap sugary nectarsubstitutes instead of their natural food.

It should be noted that the theory of cell phones causing the disappearance of bees has largely been dismissed. This theory reportedly originated from the misinterpretation of a German study, and then spread like wildfire.

Queens are "Knocked Out and Knocked Up"

In nature, queen bees live for up to five years, but workers and drones live for only a few weeks or months. Large commercial bee farms routinely kill the queen bee after only a few months by pinching off her head, and then replace her with a younger, artificially raised queen. In the film, it is suggested that artificial queen breeding is one of the primary factors causing the demise of the colonies.

Organic beekeepers say that artificial insemination is also to blame. The queen is "knocked out and knocked up." She is sedated with carbon dioxide and inseminated with semen from male drones, selected for traits, which narrows the gene pool.

The other problem is bee nutrition—or the lack thereof—in the commercial bee industry. Honey, which the bees make from natural rich plant nectar, is taken away from the hives and replaced with sugar syrup, which is completely lacking in nutrition.

All of these practices stress the honeybees' immune system. Weakened colonies are further stressed by being shipped across country or overseas, multiple times, to pollinate commercial crops—a practice which is unsustainable but made necessary due to dwindling local bee populations. Honeybee colonies are further damaged when they live near areas sprayed with pesticides and planted with GM crops, like Monsanto corn and soy. There is a great deal of evidence that the newer, systemic insecticides are fueling a virtual bee holocaust.

Are Bees Victims of the Agrichemical Industry?

The newer systemic insecticides, known as neonicotinoids, have become the fastest growing insecticides in the world. Two prominent examples, Imidacloprid and Clothianidin, are used as seed treatments in hundreds of crops.Virtually all of today's genetically engineered Bt corn is treated with neonicotinoids.

Bee colonies began disappearing in the U.S. shortly after the EPA allowed these new insecticides on the market. Even the EPA itself admits that "pesticide poisoning" is a likely cause of bee colony collapse.

These insecticides are highly toxic to bees because they are systemic, water soluble, and very pervasive. They get into the soil and groundwater where they can accumulate and remain for many years and present long-term toxicity to the hive. They enter the vascular system of the plant and are carried to all parts of it, as well as to the pollen and nectar. Neonicotinoids affect insects' central nervous systems in ways that are cumulative and irreversible. Even minute amounts can have profound effects over time. And the little bees are being exposed over and over again as pesticides become more necessary due to monoculture.

Monoculture is the growing of just one type of crop on a massive scale and is another variable contributing to CCD as there is no such thing as monoculture in nature!

Farmers used to be diversified… cows, pigs, chickens, and vegetables could be found on every farm. But today, fields of corn and soy stretch for hundreds of miles. Commercial bee farmers are no exception and have fallen prey to this agricultural model. Pests LOVE monoculture, so massive quantities of pesticides are required to crash the pest party. Beekeepers used to move beehives away from spray zones, but now this is nearly impossible. The chemicals seep into waterways, air, soil, and are incorporated into the plant itself, from the seed on up, as well as into adjacent fields.

Hives Now Show Increased Levels of Pesticide Contamination

A Purdue University studyii found multiple sources of pesticide exposure for honey bees living near agricultural fields, including high levels of Clothianidin in agricultural machinery exhaust, in the soil of unplanted fields near those planted with Bt corn, and on dandelions growing in those fields. The chemicals were also found in dead bees near hive entrances and in pollen stored in the hives.

ABC Newsiiireports:

"According to the new study, neonicotinoid insecticides 'are among the most widely used in the world, popular because they kill insects by paralyzing nerves but have lower toxicity for other animals.' Beekeepers immediately observed an increase in die-offs right around the time of corn planting using this particular kind of insecticide."

Jim Frazier from Penn State sampled hives from across the U.S. and found an average six pesticides in each hive, with one hive testing positive for 31 different pesticides, some of which are of the systemic varieties.iv

But how do we determine if it's the pesticides that are leading to CCD?

What makes it so tricky is that bees can display NO symptoms for many months after small pesticide exposures—sub-lethal exposures are hard to detect, in bees as in humans and other animals. Adverse consequences appear much later, making it difficult to connect the dots.

One of the observed effects of these insecticides is weakening of the bee's immune system.

Forager bees bring pesticide-laden pollen back to the hive, where it's consumed by all of the bees. Six months later, their immune systems fail, and they fall prey to natural bee infections, such as parasites, mites, viruses, fungi and bacteria. Indeed, pathogens such as Varroa mites, Nosemav , fungalvi and bacterial infections, and Israeli acute paralysis virusvii (IAPV) are found in large amounts in honey bee hives on the verge of collapse. In addition to immune dysfunction and opportunistic diseases, the honey bees also appear to suffer from neurological problems, disorientation, and impaired navigation.

A bee can't survive for more than 24 hours if she becomes disoriented and unable to find her way back to the hive.

Even our butterfliesviii are suffering at the hands of "pestitution"… to borrow the documentary's clever pun. A decline in the North American monarch butterfly population has been linked to increased plantings of herbicide-tolerant GM crops, and overuse of the herbicide glyphosate, which is the key chemical in Monsanto's Roundup. Glyphosate is killing milkweed plants, upon which monarchs rely for habitat and food.

Order Vanishing of Bees

Pesticides Cause Bees to Lose their Way...

A recent article in Science Newsix highlights the findings of two new bee studies, which found that even when the neonicotinoids don't kill the bees, they tend to lead to "delayed downturns in bee royalty and a subtle erosion of workforces."

"To simulate pesticide exposures that bumblebees might encounter when a field of canola blooms, entomologist Dave Goulson, of the University of Stirling in Scotland, and his colleagues fed 50 Bombus terrestris lab colonies nonfatal doses of the pesticide imidacloprid. After two weeks of eating spiked pollen and sugar water, bees were set outside and allowed to forage around the Stirling campus at will. By season's end, the pesticide-dosed colonies were an average of 8 percent to 12 percent smaller than 25 unexposed neighbor colonies," Science News reports. "More noticeably, the contaminated colonies managed to produce only about two young queens each. The other colonies averaged about 14."

Of course, Bayer CropScience, which markets imidacloprid, tries to downplay such findings. Ecotoxicologist David Fischer of Bayer CropScience pointed out that earlier research didn't find a decline in young queens, Science News reports. However, those earlier studies were done on constrained rather than free-flying bees, and Goulson reportedly replied to Fisher's objection by pointing out that "navigation isn't important when you live in a box."

Blamed for Bee Collapse, Monsanto Buys Leading Bee Research Firm

Genetic engineering of crops has also been blamed for dwindling bee populations. Monsanto, which is the leader in this type of biotechnology is likely none too pleased about the accusations, which, if found to be truthful through the dedicated application of research into the mystery, stands to lose just about everything—both their genetically engineered crop seeds and the pesticides/herbicides to go with them. It appears Monsanto has taken a proactive stance to the problem and is getting more involved—by purchasing one of the leading bee research firms... A recent Activist Post article reportsxxi :

"Recently banned from Poland with one of the primary reasons being that the company's genetically modified corn may be devastating the dying bee population, it is evident that Monsanto is under serious fire for their role in the downfall of the vital insects. It is therefore quite apparent why Monsanto bought one of the largest bee research firms on the planet.

It can be found in public company reports hosted on mainstream media that Monsanto scooped up the Beeologics firm back in September, 2011. During this time the correlation between Monsanto's GM crops and the bee decline was not explored in the mainstream, and in fact it was hardly touched upon until Polish officials addressed the serious concern amid the monumental ban.

Owning a major organization that focuses heavily on the bee collapse and is recognized by the USDA for their mission statement of "restoring bee health and protecting the future of insect pollination" could be very advantageous for Monsanto. In fact, Beelogics' company information states that the primary goal of the firm is to study the very collapse disorder that is thought to be a result — at least in part — of Monsanto's own creations."

It'll be interesting to see the results emerging from Beeologics in the future, with regards to Monsanto products and their impact on bee populations, now that Monsanto owns it lock stock and barrel...

Honey: Nectar of the Gods

Honey gathering has been a human tradition since Paleolithic times. Honey bees came to North America during the 17th Century alongside migrating humans, and have been an integral part of American culture ever since. Pure, natural, unfiltered raw honey has an abundance of medicinal and nutritional uses, including the following:
A bounty of nutrition, including enzymes, antioxidants, amino acids, vitamins and minerals Promotes the growth of friendly bacteria in your intestinal tract Good for your skin
Helps with occasional sleeplessness Promotes heart health by reducing homocysteine levels Tames allergies
Can help fight viruses, such as herpes, and bacteria, such as that present in chronic sinusitis Helps sooth a cough Helps prevent tooth decay



Honey's healing powersx come from components such as:

* Glucose oxidase: This is an enzyme that breaks down glucose and generates hydrogen peroxide, which has antimicrobial properties
* Methylglyoxal or MGO: This powerful antibacterial compound is only found in certain natural honeys (highest in Manuka honey, which is made by bees that feed off the flowers of the Manuka bush, a medicinal plant native to New Zealand)
* Bee Defensin 1:An antimicrobial peptide (AMP); this special protein is found in royal jelly (the food made especially for queen bee larvae)

Other identified AMPs in honey, such as apidaecin, may be able to prevent bacteria from defending themselves and seem to help modulate your immune system. However, in order to reap these health benefits, you must be eating the right kind of honey. Look for raw, unfiltered organic honey, and be extremely careful about what passes for "honey" on big box store shelves.

Precautionary Note...

Although raw honey is loaded with all of the benefits described above, you still must exercise caution in how much you consume because it's about 70 percent fructose. Fructose is fructose, and if you're challenged with insulin resistance, you will not likely do well eating large quantities of honey. Please also note that honey should not be given to children under one year of age. Infants less than 12 months old are at risk for infant botulism from eating honey that contains Clostridium botulinum spores, and in a baby, this can result in nervous system damage or even death. These spores do not affect older children and adults.

Are You Eating Funny Honey?

Fake honey is unfortunately common in this era of food manipulation and control. Some Chinese brokers sell a mixture of sugar water, malt sweeteners, corn or rice syrup, jaggery, barley malt sweetener or other additives, and label it as "honey". Nearly all of this fake honey is made in China.

A good deal of this "funny honey" is also tainted with illegal antibiotics, including chloramphenicol, which can cause DNA damage and cancer, and heavy metals such as lead.

A recent report by Food Safety Newsxi reveals just how often they get away with this trickery. More than 75 percent of the honey on American supermarket shelves may be ultra-processed—to the point that all inherent medicinal properties are completely gone—and then smuggled into the country by the barrel drum. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (USFDA) states that any product that's been ultra-filtered and no longer contains pollen is NOT honey. In their investigation, Food Safety News discovered the following:

* 76 percent of honey samples bought at grocery stores (such as TOP Food, Safeway, QFC, Kroger, Harris Teeter, etc.) were absent of pollen
* 77 percent of the honey from big box stores (like Costco, Sam's Club, Walmart, and Target) were absent of pollen
* 100 percent of the honey sampled from drug stores (like Walgreens, Rite-Aid, and CVS Pharmacy) were absent of pollen

The good news is, all of the samples from farmers markets, co-ops, and natural stores like Trader Joe's had the full, proper compliment of pollen, as did organic brands from common grocery stores. But fake honey—the sorry substitute that it is—might be the ONLY thing even remotely resembling honey that you'll be able to get if we don't find a way to save our honey bees from total global collapse.

The Buzz about Organic Beekeeping

One way to make sure your honey is high quality and contains the full compliment of natural health benefits is to obtain it from organic beekeepers, preferably local ones. Supporting organic beekeepers will also increase healthy bee colonies, which are so crucial to our food supply.

Organic beekeepers take a far different approach to beekeeping than large migratory operations. They don't feed their bees the sugar syrups and artificial pollen substitutes typically used in commercial bee operations, and they avoid chemical pesticides. They have fewer hives, and they don't truck their bees around for pollination.

Several countries have banned many systemic insecticides, including France, Italy, Germany, and Slovenia. Most European nations place safety as the highest priority. When there is evidence of an environmental problem, they take the chemical off the market. Not so in America, where government regulators are in the grips of the agrichemical industry, and "pestitution" remains legal.

But there is some good news. One of America's most effective environmental action groups, the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC)xii , has come to the aid of our honey bees. NRDC sued EPA in federal court about improper approval of a certain systemic pesticide—and won. They stopped the retail sale of Bayer's toxic Moventoxiii as of January 2010. As these damaging chemicals are eliminated, there is hope for honey bee recovery. In France, honey bee populations bounced back just one year after these products were banned from the marketplace.

What You Can Do

Vanishing of the Bees recommends four actions you can take to help preserve our honey bees:

* Support organic farmers and shop at local farmer's markets as often as possible. You can "vote with your fork" three times a day.
* Cut the use of toxic chemicals in your house and on your lawn, and use organic pest control.
* Better yet, get rid of your lawn altogether and plant a garden. Lawns offer very little benefit for the environment. Both flower and vegetable gardens provide good honey bee habitats.
* Become an amateur beekeeper. Having a hive in your garden requires only about an hour of your time per week, benefits your local ecosystem, and you can enjoy your own honey!

If you are interested in more information about bee preservation, the following organizations are a good place to start.

* Pesticide Action Network Bee Campaignxiv
* The Foundation for the Preservation of Honey Beesxv
* American Beekeeping Federationxvi
* Help the Honey Beesxvii

To Bee or Not to Bee…

Honey bee sanctuaries are springing up everywhere, as the award-winning documentary "Queen of the Sun"xviii portrays. Many city dwellers are now becoming backyard beekeepers. Perhaps CCD is a blessing in disguise in that it's brought bees to the forefront of our awareness and sparked a renewed interest in organic beekeeping. Increased numbers of amateur beekeepers are bringing these fuzzy pollinators into their own neighborhoods. More cities are changing ordinances that formerly prevented beekeeping inside city limits—including New York City.

For more information about raising bees, consult The Practical Beekeeperxix and the Yahoo group "Organic Beekeepers."xx

Order Vanishing of Bees

References:

* i New York Times April 11, 2008
* ii PLoS One January 3, 2012
* iii ABC News March 15, 2012
* iv Daily Green April 18, 2008
* v Science Daily April 14, 2009
* vi Science Daily October 7, 2010
* vii Science Daily September 6, 2007
* viii The Organic & Non-GMO Report July 21, 2011
* ix Science News March 29, 2012
* x Scientific American March 21, 2012
* xi Food Safety News November 7, 2011
* xii National Resources Defense Council
* xiii NDRC December 29, 2009
* xiv Pesticide Action Network Bee Campaign
* xv Foundation for the Preservation of Honey Bees
* xvi American Beekeeping Federation
* xvii Help the Honey Bees
* xviii Queen of the Sun
* xix Bush Farms The Practical Beekeeper
* xx Yahoo Group Organic Beekeepers

[DrJonescaptain of 1,000]

This actually appeared May 1st:

By Dr. Mercola

Mayday! Mayday!

I'm pleased to announce that the Money Bomb Against Monsanto has been officially launched!

Yes, it is official.

Volunteers and staff from the California Right to Know Campaign are submitting nearly 1 million signed petitions from registered voters across the state of California to county officials, to place Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act on the Ballot for November 6.

Starting May 1, and extending through May 26, a broad coalition of farmers, health groups, and organic food manufacturers, will attempt to raise one million dollars (i.e. "The Money Bomb"). Donations can be made online, via regular snail mail, and over the phone. All donations will support state GMO-labeling campaigns and their defense from biotech bully lawsuits.

The Right to Know Gentically Engineered Food Act

This Act will require food manufacturers to identify genetically engineered ingredients on the labels of foods sold in California.

When California voters pass this ballot initiative, the Label Genetically Engineered Food Act will also not allow the common practice of mislabeling genetically engineered foods as "natural" or "all natural." It's imperative to understand why this initiative is so important and how it can affect all Americans, regardless of where you live.

California has the eighth largest economy in the world, so passing a labeling law for genetically engineered foods in California can have the same impact as passing a federal law.

Large food companies are unlikely to accept having dual labeling; one for California and another for the rest of the country. It would be an expensive logistical nightmare, not to mention a massive PR problem.

To avoid the dual labeling, many would likely opt to not include using any genetically engineered ingredients in their product, especially if the new label would be the equivalent of a skull and crossbones. Those who opt not to replace GE ingredients from the get-go will likely find themselves unable to sell their products, as a majority of consumers reportedly will not buy foods once they know they're genetically engineered. Unable to sell their products, such companies will eventually be forced to stop contaminating our food with genetically engineered ingredients, or risk going out of business.

This is what happened in Europe and over 40 countries around the world. It can happen in the U.S. This is why we can't leave California to battle the biotech giants on their own. They need your help! Donating funds to this campaign may be the best money you'll spend all year to safeguard your health, and the health of your children.

Do you know which foods are genetically engineered when you go grocery shopping for your family? Wouldn't you want to know? Genetically engineered foods have been on the market since 1996. It's time they tell us what's in the food we're eating on a daily basis. Making a generous donation to this campaign is the best chance every American has at this point to make that happen!

The Proverbial David versus Goliath

Naturally, the biotech industry is not about to let this pass without a fight. Monsanto, the Farm Bureau, the Grocery Manufacturers Association, along with corporate agribusiness, are all raising millions of dollars to spread their propaganda in an effort to defeat the California Ballot Initiative, just like they did a decade ago in Oregon. At that time, a cabal of corporate giants, including Monsanto and DuPont, calling themselves The Coalition Against the Costly Labeling Law, outspent the pro-labeling group 30-1, and successfully defeated the labeling initiative by scaring voters into believing that labeling genetically engineered foods was unnecessary and would raise food prices.

They did it again in Washington state last month, where campaign contributions to three of the eight politicians on the Senate Agriculture Committee—Democrat Brian Hatfield, and Republicans Jim Honeyford and Mark Schoesler—guaranteed the bill's demise in committee. Right now, the biotech industry is also working to defeat similar GE labeling bills in Vermont, Hawaii, Connecticut, and other states. According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, Monsanto spent $8 million on their lobbying efforts in 2010 alone, and gave more than $400,000 in political contributions. Monsanto also spent $120 million on advertising, to convince consumers that genetically engineered foods are safe – despite the overwhelming scientific evidence showing otherwise.

Let's send them a message, loud and clear: We have the right to know what they put into our food!

You can do so by making a donation right now. The money will be used to counter the industry propaganda so that we can win this ballot.

We're Dropping the Money Bomb!

About twenty years ago, the FDA decided to deny consumers the right to know whether their food was genetically altered or not. This shameful regulation was spearheaded by Michael Taylor, a former Monsanto lawyer who transferred into the offices of the FDA. Taylor is not the only ex-Monsanto employee that ended up in a position of power within the US federal government and its regulatory agencies, and this is precisely why previous efforts to get genetically engineered foods labeled have been blocked.

Not so this time!

Ballot Initiatives like the one in California is one way for citizens to take back control from compromised politicians and government officials and bypass them entirely. To sweeten the deal further, a group of "Right to Know" public interest organizations and organic companies have pledged to match the first million dollars raised in this nationwide "Drop the Money Bomb on Monsanto Campaign."

So click here, and help us raise 1 million dollars to win this historic campaign! These "Right to Know" groups include:

* The Organic Consumers Association
* Mercola.com
* Food Democracy Now
* Nature's Path
* Lundberg Family Farms
* Eden Foods, and
* The Organic Consumers Fund

Can We Win?

Yes, I believe we can! But we need to get the word out, which requires a strong campaign to educate the citizens of California to vote for the initiative on November 6. According to Ronnie Cummins of the Organic Consumers Association, we stand a good chance of winning in California because:

* This time, we have far more scientific information and greater public awareness on our side. GE contamination is now a mainstream media issue. Monsanto has become the most hated corporation in the world.
* This time, we have overwhelming public support. Polls show that more than 8 out of 10 voters in California want mandatory GE labeling.
* This time, we have built the strongest coalition of concerned food consumers in history, for the exclusive purpose of passing this law.

The Time for Action is NOW!

Today, I ask you to invest in this Initiative. Invest in your future. And invest as generously as you can. If you've already sent in your donation, thank you! If not, please contribute to this historic and critical campaign today. And then please forward this email to your friends. Share it on Facebook and Twitter. Print it out, hand it to all your friends. Every action counts!

As stated by Ronnie Cummins with the Organic Consumers Association:

"Monsanto is one of the most powerful, arrogant and destructive companies in the world. For decades, they have controlled the world's food supply by buying off politicians and regulatory agencies, intimidating small farmers, manipulating the outcome of scientific studies, lying to consumers - and threatening to sue states like Vermont if they dare to pass a GMO labeling law.

... Despite Monsanto's claims to the contrary, scientists are clear: genetically engineered food has been linked to a wide range of health hazards, including kidney and liver damage, infertility, auto-immune disorders, allergies and autism, accelerated aging, and birth defects...

We have the right to know if the food we buy has been genetically engineered.... It's time to take back our food. Our farms. Our power. It's time to show Monsanto what ordinary people like us can do when we come together. It's time to drop the money bomb on Monsanto."

Hundreds of thousands of people making small donations can help the coalition behind this initiative run a dynamic, effective campaign to bring down Monsanto and the rest of the Biotech Bullies.

So please, join us, and make a donation right now! You can donate online, by phone, or by dropping a check in the mail. "

[DrJonescaptain of 1,000]

Today is Fast Sunday; fittingly, Dr Mercola discusses the health benefits of FASTING. Read about Intermittent Fasting also:

By Dr. Mercola

If you're already off to a good start on a healthy fitness plan, and you're looking for ways to take it to the next level, then you might want to consider a form of fasting called Scheduled Eating, or intermittent fasting.

In essence this fitness-enhancing strategy looks at the timing of meals, as well as when NOT to eat. This isn't one of those fad plans, where you eat just one or two things for several days in a row.

In fact, the longest time you'll ever abstain from food is 36 hours, although 14-18 hours is more common. You can also opt to simply delay eating. For example, skipping breakfast may be just the thing to kick-start you off a plateau in your fitness routine.

But hypoglycemics and diabetics beware—there is a proper way to implement fasting, and hypoglycemic and/or diabetics need to be particularly careful in order to not worsen their health.Ditto for pregnant or breastfeeding women.

The plan is supported by a growing body of evidence showing that certain forms of fasting are good for you, and Mark Sisson's excellent series on this topic on his blog on marksdailyapple.com, delve into this topic at some depth.

For me, the issue of fasting is a major shift from my typical recommendations.

I've not been a major advocate for it in the past, but as many of you who have been reading this site for years know, I am always learning. Life is a journey, and no one has all the answers.

I seek to explore the best concepts out there to maximize learning.

To that end, I've been playing around with various forms of fasting for about a year and a half, and I now feel I'm ready to make some suggestions based on my experience.

First of all, I believe that fasting is not something you should undertake willy-nilly. You need to pay careful attention to your body, your energy levels, and how it makes you feel in general—especially if you're diabetic, hypoglycemic, or pregnant. I'll share some precautionary notes in a moment.

Furthermore, remember that the type of diet and/or form of fasting that might be best for you will vary depending on your weight, health, and fitness goals. Is your goal to live a longer, healthier life? Or are you a competitive or elite athlete? It may surprise many to learn that you cannot achieve maximum fitness and maximum longevity and fertility at the same time.

Each goal requires a different strategy, and will not provide you with equal end results. For example, elite female athletes typically have a difficult time getting pregnant—their fitness has been maximized at the expense of their fertility, as female hormones depend on sufficient amounts of body fat.

While most people need to address the foods they DO eat, before considering skipping meals, fasting can provide you with many benefits, and is another tool you can experiment with to help you reach your goals. However, please keep in mind that proper nutrition becomes even MORE important when fasting, so addressing your diet really should be your first step. Common sense will tell you that fasting combined with a denatured, highly processed, toxin-rich diet is likely to do more harm than good, as you're not giving your body proper fuel to thrive when you DO eat.

Intermittent Fasting for Weight Loss

In part 1, Mark Sisson discusses the merits of using fasting—in whatever form—to achieve weight loss. Overall, the research is very favorable for this goal. He lists three studies from recent years into fasting for weight loss, all of which showed positive results:

1. Non-obese patients lost an average of four percent of their total fat with alternate-day fasting for 22 days. Their fasting insulin also decreased.i
2. Alternate-day fasting was also effective for obese patients in a 2009 study. On fasting days, participants consumed 25 percent of their daily calorie needs. On average, they lost just over 5.5 pounds in eight weeks, and about three percent of their total body fat. Total cholesterol and LDL ("bad") cholesterol decreased, while HDL ("good") cholesterol remained unchanged. Systolic blood pressure also decreased.ii
3. In young, overweight women, alternate-day fasting was just as effective as calorie restriction for promoting weight loss and improving metabolic markers.iii

One of the mechanisms that makes fasting so effective for weight loss is the fact that it provokes the secretion of human growth hormone (HGH), which is a fat-burning hormone. It also plays an important role in muscle building. Fasting also increases catecholamines, which increases resting energy expenditure, while decreasing insulin levels, which allows stored fat to be burned for fuel. Together, these and other factors will turn you into an effective fat-burning machine.

Hence, if like many tens of millions of people, your goal is to shed excess fat, fasting can be both effective and beneficial for improving many disease markers. The type of fast you choose appears to be less important, so pick whichever one fits your lifestyle, schedule, and temperament the best.

I'll summarize the four different types of intermittent fasting programs that are covered very well in Mark Sisson's excellent series on this subject (see Sources below for links to his blog). Mark is particularly well qualified to report on this topic as he's a leading blogger in the Paleo community, and a former elite Olympic Trials athlete.

Intermittent Fasting for Athletes

One 2008 study that evaluated the effect of fasting during the Muslim observance of Ramadan found it had a positive effect on body mass and other health markers in trained athletesiv.

While athletes are certainly concerned with shedding excess fat, another overriding concern is the optimization of muscle growth. For this, you need protein. As a general guideline, you'll want to consume a high quality protein 30-60 minutes after finishing your workout—whey being one of the most ideal for this purpose, as it helps your body build muscle and lose fat simultaneously. Research has also shown that high quality protein from meat and whey has a positive effect on blood sugar, muscle building, changing body composition, and sparing muscle while losing fat.

Many find it works out well to break their fast after working out, which would allow you to get the best of both worlds: the benefits of working out in a fasted state, and protein-loading about half-an-hour to an hour afterward. This is my new strategy. I will typically delay my breakfast until 11 or 12 and workout around 9 AM. Since my last meal is typically around 7 PM, I will fast for about 14-17 hours before I eat my first meal. The fact that you are sleeping during most of this time makes it relatively painless and easy to do.

Avoid grain carbs, however. Although popular with many, "carb loading" is a mistake, particularly for people engaged in intense strength training, as you will burn carb fuel very quickly and then "hit the wall." The same goes for most people who start their day with muffins, bagels, or pancakes for example. This type of breakfast typically ignites a vicious cycle of hunger and snacking on even more carbs. And the more you continue eating these carb snacks, the more insulin resistant you become.

Part of what makes working out in a fasted state so effective is that your body actually has a preservation mechanism that protects your active muscle from wasting itself. So if you don't have sufficient fuel in your system when you exercise, you're going to break down other tissues but not the active muscle, i.e. the muscle being exercised. According to Ori Hofmekler, author of The Warrior Diet, you can quite literally re-design your physique using a combination of under-eating and exercise. However this really only works well once your metabolism has become proficient at burning fat. Mark discusses this in his series.

What about competitive sports athletes who may be exerting themselves in competitions several times a week—should they fast, and if so, when? Mark Sisson offers the following advicev:

"Personally, I would eat on game days. It might be fun to try out a few fasted games, just to see how you perform, but the likely optimal way to integrate fasting into competition is to save the fasting days for your training days. By doing this, you'll be "training low, playing high," which should result in some beneficial adaptations after training and improved performance in the game (when you're "high" or fully replete with nutrients and calories)."

If you're an athlete, keep in mind that fasting can be contraindicated with overtraining, so be cautious if you're more or less in constant training.

Intermittent Fasting for General Health and Longevity

Fasting is historically common-place as it has been a part of spiritual practice for millennia. But modern science has confirmed there are many good reasons for fasting, including:

* Normalizing your insulin sensitivity, which is key for optimal health as insulin resistance (which is what you get when your insulin sensitivity plummets) is a primary contributing factor to nearly all chronic disease, from diabetes to heart disease and even cancer
* Normalizing ghrelin levels, also known as "the hunger hormone"
* Promoting human growth hormone (HGH) production, which plays an important part in health, fitness and slowing the aging process
* Lowering triglyceride levels
* Reducing inflammation and lessening free radical damage

There's also plenty of research showing that fasting has a beneficial impact on longevity in animals. There are a number of mechanisms contributing to this effect. Normalizing insulin sensitivity is a major one, but fasting also inhibits the mTOR pathway, which plays an important part in driving the aging process. The fact that it improves a number of potent disease markers also contributes to fasting's overall beneficial effects on general health.

Interestingly, one recent study that included more than 200 individuals, found that fasting increased the participants' low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL or "bad" cholesterol) and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL, the "good" cholesterol) by 14 percent and 6 percent, respectivelyvi. Why would fasting raise total cholesterol? Dr. Benjamin D. Horne, PhD, MPH, director of cardiovascular and genetic epidemiology at the Intermountain Medical Center Heart Institute, and the study's lead author, offers the following explanation:

"Fasting causes hunger or stress. In response, the body releases more cholesterol, allowing it to utilize fat as a source of fuel, instead of glucose. This decreases the number of fat cells in the body... This is important because the fewer fat cells a body has, the less likely it will experience insulin resistance, or diabetes."

Even more remarkable, the study also found that fasting triggered a dramatic rise in HGH—1,300 percent in women, and an astounding 2,000 percent in men!

HGH, commonly referred to as "the fitness hormone" plays an important role in maintaining health, fitness and longevity, including promotion of muscle growth, and boosting fat loss by revving up your metabolism. The fact that it helps build muscle while simultaneously promoting fat loss explains why HGH helps you lose weight without sacrificing muscle mass, and why even athletes can benefit from the practice (as long as they don't overtrain and are careful about their nutrition).

The only other thing that can compete in terms of dramatically boosting HGH levels is high-intensity interval training. If you're over the age of 30, especially if you lead an increasingly sedentary lifestyle, you've likely entered a phase known as somatopause (age-related growth hormone deficiency). As your HGH levels decrease, your levels of insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) also decrease, and this is yet another important part of what drives your body's aging process.

Variations of Fasting

In his blog on marksdailyapple.com, Mark Sisson delves into four different variations of fasting, and how to implement them. The variations he includes are:

1. LeanGains (a fasting protocol by Martin Berkhanvii )—A daily 14-16 hour fast, during which time you consume nothing, with the exception of non-caloric fluids. Sleeping time is included in this time-frame, leaving an 8-10 hour window during the day when you're allowed to eat.

This protocol is designed with regular exercise in mind, with specific nutrient ratios for workout days and rest days, and is geared for those who want to shed excess fat and gain muscle mass. Hence, it's best suited for those who are actually exercising and lifting weights each week and can tolerate working out in a fasted state.
2. Eat Stop Eat (created by Brad Pilonviii)—In this protocol, you fast for a full 24 hours once or twice a week. Your fast should be broken with a regular-sized meal (i.e. avoid gorging when coming off your fast), and you can maintain a regular exercise program without any special diet recommendations for workout days.

Fasting for 24 hours can be tough for some people, but I would agree with Mark's advice that eating a high-fat, low-carb diet can make 24-hour fasting easier, as a higher fat diet will tend to normalize your hunger hormones and provide improved satiety for longer periods of time.
3. The Warrior Diet (by Ori Hofmekler)—This is another protocol designed to improve your fitness by exercising in a fasted state. I've interviewed Ori and posted detailed articles on this in the past. His plan calls for 20 hours of fasting, and four hours of "feasting." You exercise during the day in a fasted state. Raw vegetables are allowed during your fast, but no protein, which is reserved for "feasting" or post-exercise recovery meals.

To learn more about the Warrior Diet, please see this previous interview with Ori.
4. Alternate Day Fasting—This fasting protocol is exactly as it sounds: one day off, one day on. When you include sleeping time, the fast can end up being as long as 32-36 hours.

As Mark notes, this may be the most difficult of all types of fasting, as it will require you to go to bed with an empty stomach a few times a week. It's definitely not for everyone.

Mark rounds off his list with one last suggestion: to simply let your hunger guide you and skip meals if you're not hungry. While this should work really well for those who are otherwise healthy and are not struggling with food cravings, it may not work if you're constantly craving food. Food cravings is a sign that you're not providing your body with proper nutrients in the appropriate ratios, so following your hunger in this case could be staggeringly counterproductive.

Who Should Use Extra Caution when Fasting, or Avoid it Altogether?

As I mentioned earlier, if you're hypoglycemic, diabetic, or pregnant (and/or breastfeeding), you need to be extra cautious with fasting, and may be best served to avoid it entirely, until you've normalized your blood glucose and insulin levels, or weaned the baby.

Hypoglycemia is a condition characterized by an abnormally low level of blood sugar. It's commonly associated with diabetes, but you can be hypoglycemic even if you're not diabetic. Common symptoms of a hypoglycemic crash include:

* Headache
* Weakness
* Tremors
* Irritability
* Hunger

As your blood glucose levels continue to plummet, more severe symptoms can set in, such as:

* Confusion and/or abnormal behavior
* Visual disturbances, such as double vision and blurred vision
* Seizures
* Loss of consciousness

One of the keys to eliminating hypoglycemia is to eliminate sugars, especially fructose from your diet. It will also be helpful to eliminate grains, and replace them with higher amounts of quality proteins and healthful fats, However it will take some time for your blood sugar to normalize. You'll want to pay careful attention to hypoglycemic signs and symptoms, and if you suspect that you're crashing, make sure to eat something. Ideally, you should avoid fasting if you're hypoglycemic, and work on your overall diet to normalize your blood sugar levels first. Then try out one of the less rigid versions of fasting and work your way up to a full 24-hour fast.

As for pregnant and/or lactating women, I don't think fasting would be a wise choice. Your baby needs plenty of nutrients, during and after birth, and there's no research supporting fasting during this important time. Sisson lists three studies on fasting during pregnancy, and all three suggested it might be contraindicated, as it can alter fetal breathing patterns, heartbeat, and increase gestational diabetes. It may even induce premature labor.

My recommendation would be to really focus on improving your nutrition during this crucial time. A diet with plenty of raw organic, biodynamic foods, and foods high in healthful fats, coupled with high quality proteins will give your baby a head start on good health. You'll also want to be sure to include plenty of cultured and fermented foods to optimize your—and consequently your baby's—gut flora. For more information, please see this previous article that includes specific dietary recommendations for a healthy pregnancy, as well as my interview with Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride.

Others categories of people that would be best served to avoid fasting include those living with chronic stress, and those with cortisol dysregulation.

Fasting—Is it Right for You?

I understand it can get confusing at times, trying to determine when and what to eat in order to optimize your health. Unfortunately, besides a few basic principles that will apply to virtually everyone, such as strictly limiting consumption of sugars (particularly fructose) and grains, the rest is really a matter of figuring out what works for your individual biochemistry. This requires some trial and error.

For example, there is good evidence supporting the recommendation to eat a protein-heavy breakfast if you want to lose weight, and even more so if you exercise first thing in the morning to optimize muscle growth and recovery. But there may be times when you feel like you've hit a plateau, and while your diet and exercise routine may be good, the simple act of skipping breakfast and exercising on an empty stomach could be just the thing that will kick start you onto that next level.

Personally, I skip breakfast and exercise in a fasting state whenever I've gained a few pounds and want to get them off. I find this works well for me. While I'm not eating breakfast, I don't really eliminate that meal entirely; rather I'm simply delaying it until noon or later, in order to reap the metabolic rewards of exercise combined with calorie restriction.

While I have not widely promoted calorie restriction in the past (as I believe most people need to address the foods they DO eat, before considering skipping meals), it is an important piece of the puzzle, and intermittent fasting may be helpful for many, especially if you've already mastered a nutritious diet, which really should be your first step. Fasting combined with a highly processed, toxin-rich diet is not going to do your health any favors. In fact, you may be making things worse, since you're not giving your body proper fuel when you DO eat.

Also remember that fasting does not mean abstaining from ALL food for extended periods of time, but rather a dramatic reduction of calorie intake at regular intervals—whether you opt for a 16, 20, or 24 hour fast once or twice a week, or fasting every other day, or simply delaying certain meals, such as skipping breakfast and exercising on an empty stomach. As always, listen to your body, and go slow; work your way up to full day fasts if your normal schedule has included multiple meals a day. Also be sure to address any hypoglycemic tendencies, as it can get increasingly dangerous the longer you go without eating to level out your blood sugar.

Bottom Line

I will finish off with Mark Sisson's "bottom line," practical, and sound recommendations, as he sums it up nicelyix:

"... [T]here is no concrete, objective law regarding the suitability of intermittent fasting for a particular person.

If you're truly hungry, eat. Failing to do so will add stress.

If you're stressed, don't IF (intermittent fast). You don't need another stressor.

If you're training six days a week, don't IF. Unless you're genetically blessed, you'll need lots of fuel to prevent overtraining.

If you're not hungry, don't eat. If coffee's enough, skip breakfast.

If life is good, try fasting.

In the end, the prudent path is to simply listen to your body. Don't let CW grazing propaganda drive you to eat when you aren't hungry; don't let the IF dogma make you feel guilty about grabbing a handful of macadamia nuts and jerky in between meals when you are fasting. Try it out, skip a meal, go fourteen hours or so (you already do eight every night) without eating, get a workout in, go for a walk, go about your day and see how you feel. A quick trial is not going to kill you...

Are you lightheaded?

Are you weak?

Did your workout suffer?

Then maybe it's not for you. Maybe you need to fix a few things (Primal eating, sleep, chronic stress) and then try again..."

References:

* i American Journal of Clinical Nutrition January 2005: 81(1); 69-73
* ii American Journal of Clinical Nutrition November 2009: 90(5); 1138-1143
* iii International Journal of Obesity May 2011: 35, 714-727
* iv International Journal of Sport nutrition and exercise metabolism December 2008;18(6):617-27
* v Mark's Daily Apple, Fasting Part 7
* vi Eurekalert, Study finds routine periodic fasting is good for your health, and your heart, April 3, 2011,
* vii The LeanGains Guide, Martin Berkhan
* viii BradPilon.com
* ix Mark's Daily Apple, Who Should and Shouldn't Try Fasting?

[Reginacaptain of 10]

I find the articles from Dr Mercola very interesting, enlightening, and easy to access. It is good to have such a site where one can search to clarify and find answers re health issues.

[DrJonescaptain of 1,000]

I find the articles from Dr Mercola very interesting, enlightening, and easy to access. It is good to have such a site where one can search to clarify and find answers re health issues.

Agreed, and welcome to the forum, Regina.

[DrJonescaptain of 1,000]

Longevity: Dr Mercola recommends some daily supplements:

By Dr. Mercola

Nutritionists have long been interested in the dynamics of telomere length in the body, and how telomeres figure in to human health and life expectancy. Telomeres were first discovered in 1973 by Alexey Olovnikov.

He found that the tiny units of DNA at the very end of each chromosome—the telomere—shorten with time because they cannot replicate completely each time the cell divides and they may be the most powerful biological clock that has yet to be identified.

Hence, as you get older, your telomeres get shorter and shorter. Eventually, DNA replication and cell division ceases completely, at which point you die. However, a growing body of research is showing that certain nutrients play a huge role in protecting telomere length; greatly affecting how long you live.

One Way Nutrition Affects Longevity

For example, in one recent studyi, scientists found that the B vitamin folate plays an important part in maintenance of DNA integrity and DNA methylation, which in turn influences telomere length.

Researchers also found that women who use vitamin B12 supplements have longer telomeres than those who don't. Vitamin D3, zinc, iron, omega-3 fatty acids, and vitamins C and E also influence telomere length. This supports the findings of an earlier study from 2009, which provided the first epidemiologic evidence that the use of multivitamins by women is associated with longer telomeres.ii According to the authors:

"Compared with nonusers, the relative telomere length of leukocyte DNA was on average 5.1% longer among daily multivitamin users. In the analysis of micronutrients, higher intakes of vitamins C and E from foods were each associated with longer telomeres, even after adjustment for multivitamin use."

The mechanism by which nutrients appear to affect telomere length is by influencing the activity of telomerase, an enzyme that adds the telomeric repeats to the ends of your DNA. Thousands of studies have been published on telomerase, and they are well-known to maintain genomic stability, prevent the inappropriate activation of DNA damage pathways, and regulate cellular aging.

In 1984, Elizabeth Blackburn PhD, professor of biochemistry and biophysics at UCSF, discovered that the enzyme telomerase actually has the ability to lengthen the telomere by synthesizing DNA from an RNA primer. She, along with Carol Greider and Jack Szostak were jointly awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 2009 "for the discovery of how chromosomes are protected by telomeres and the enzyme telomerase."

The Science of Growing Younger

I believe the science of telomeres offers the most exciting and viable possibility for extreme life extension—the kind of anti-aging strategy that can actually allow you to regenerate and in effect "grow younger." Naturally, researchers are hard at work devising pharmaceutical strategies to accomplish this, but there's solid evidence that simple lifestyle strategies and nutritional intervention can do this too. This is great news, as short telomeres are a risk factor not just for death itself, but for many diseases as well.

For example, telomere shortening has been linked to the diseases listed below. But animal studies have also shown that these types of health problems can be reversed by restoring telomerase functioning:

Decreased immune response against infections Type 2 diabetes Atherosclerotic lesions
Neurodegenerative diseases Testicular, splenic, intestinal atrophy DNA damage
Top 12 Key Nutrients for Life Extension

The featured study found the following nutrients to have a beneficial impact on telomere length:
Vitamin B12 Zinc Vitamin D
Omega-3 Vitamin C Vitamin E


Below, I will review a few of those, plus several additional recommendations for what I believe are among the most important nutrients to maintain and promote telomere lengthening.

Naturally, any attempt at a list like this is bound to fail to some degree as we really need a balance of a wide variety of nutrients. However, I believe it's possible to make some general recommendations based on the fact that most people are sorely deficient in many of these key nutrients that we know are important for optimal health. Others, such as astaxanthin and curcumin, just have such robust scientific support that it would seem foolish to ignore them when the benefits are so profound. With that said, here are my recommendations for the top 12 anti-aging nutrients, followed by two bonus strategies that do not involve taking supplements that can also help radically increase your lifespan by protecting your telomeres.

I have listed the 12 nutrients below in the order that I believe they have in importance. I personally take the first six every day but the vitamin D is through sun exposure, not through an oral supplement.

1. Vitamin D

In one study of more than 2,000 women, those with higher vitamin D levels were found to have fewer aging-related changes in their DNA, as well as lowered inflammatory responsesiii. Women with higher levels of vitamin D are more likely to have longer telomeres, and vice versa. This means that people with higher levels of vitamin D may actually age more slowly than people with lower levels of vitamin D.

Your leukocyte telomere length (LTL) is a predictor for aging related diseases. As you age, your LTL's become shorter, but, if you suffer from chronic inflammation, your telomeres decrease in length much faster, because your body's inflammatory response accelerates leukocyte turnover. Your vitamin D concentrations also decrease with age, whereas your C-reactive protein (a mediator of inflammation) increases. This inverse double-whammy increases your overall risk of developing autoimmune diseases such as multiple sclerosis, and rheumatoid arthritis.

The good news is that vitamin D is a potent inhibitor of your body's inflammatory response, and by reducing inflammation, you diminish your turnover of leukocytes, effectively creating a positive chain reaction that can help protect you against a variety of diseases. In essence, it protects your body from the deterioration of aging. Researchers have found that subsets of leukocytes have receptors for the active form of vitamin D (D3), which allows the vitamin to have a direct effect on these cells. This may also explain the specific connection between vitamin D and autoimmune disease.

The absolute best way to optimize your vitamin D levels would be through safe sun exposure. I am fully aware that many will not be able to implement this recommendation due to lifestyle constraints, but I feel I would be reprehensibly negligent if I did not emphasize how superior photo vitamin D is compared to oral. So for those who are able to, I have provided the following video that helps you find the times exposing your skin to the sun will actually produce vitamin D in your location.

2. Astaxanthin (derived from the microalgae Haematoccous pluvialis)

In the 2009 study on multivitamin use and telomere length, longer telomeres were also associated with the use of antioxidant formulasiv. According to the authors, telomeres are particularly vulnerable to oxidative stress. Additionally, inflammation induces oxidative stress and lowers the activity of telomerase (again, that's the enzyme responsible for maintaining your telomeres).

Astaxanthin has emerged as one of the most potent and beneficial antioxidants currently known, with potent anti-inflammatory and DNA-protective capabilities. Research has even shown that it can protect against DNA damage induced by gamma radiationv. It has a number of unique features that make it stand out from the crowd.

For example, it is by far the most powerful carotenoid antioxidant when it comes to free radical scavenging: astaxanthin is 65 times more powerful than vitamin C, 54 times more powerful than beta-carotene, and 14 times more powerful than vitamin Evi. It's also far more effective than other carotenoids at "singlet oxygen quenching," which is a particular type of oxidation. It is 550 times more powerful than vitamin E, and 11 times more powerful than beta-carotene at neutralizing singlet oxygen.

Astaxanthin crosses both your blood-brain barrier AND your blood-retinal barrier (beta carotene and lycopene do not), which brings antioxidant and anti-inflammatory protection to your eyes, brain and central nervous system.

Another feature that separates astaxanthin from other carotenoids is that it cannot function as a pro-oxidant. Many antioxidants will act as pro-oxidants (meaning they start to cause rather than combat oxidation) when present in your tissues in sufficient concentrations. This is why you don't want to go overboard taking too many antioxidant supplements like beta-carotene, for example. Astaxanthin, on the other hand, does not function as a pro-oxidant, even when present in high amounts, which makes it highly beneficial.

Lastly, one of its most profound features is its unique ability to protect the entire cell from damage—both the water-soluble part and the fat-soluble portion of the cell. Other antioxidants affect just one or the other. This is due to astaxanthin's unique physical characteristics that allow it to reside within the cell membrane will also protecting the inside of the cell. To learn more about astaxanthin, please listen to the following interview with Dr. Robert Corish.

3. Ubiquinol (CoQ10)

Coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10) is the fifth most popular supplement in the United States, taken by about 53 percent of Americans, according to a 2010 survey by ConsumerLab.comvii. This is a good thing as one in every four Americans over 45 is taking a statin and every single one of these individuals needs to be taking it.

CoQ10 is used by every cell in your body. In fact, it is so important for your body's daily functions that it is also known as "ubiquinone" because it's 'ubiquitous' in the human body.

What you may not know, however, is that to benefit from the form of the nutrient needed to produce cellular energy and help you reduce the typical signs of aging, your body must convert the ubiquinone to the reduced form, called ubiquinol -- and research is showing that this reduced form may actually be superior for your health in a number of ways. If you're under 25 years old your body is capable of converting CoQ10 from the oxidized to the reduced form. However, if you're older, your body becomes more and more challenged to convert the oxidized CoQ10 to ubiquinol.

Premature aging is one primary side effect of having too little CoQ10 because this essential vitamin recycles other antioxidants, such as vitamin C and E. CoQ10 deficiency also accelerates DNA damage, and because CoQ10 is beneficial to heart health and muscle function this depletion leads to fatigue, muscle weakness, soreness and eventually heart failure.

In a previous interview with Dr. Stephen Sinatra, he recounts an experiment from the mid-90's on aging rats. The average lifespan of a rat is two years. Rats given CoQ10, at the end of their life, had more energy, better coats, and better appetites, compared to the rats that did not get CoQ10. The supplement basically had a potent anti-aging effect, in the sense it maintained youthfulness until the very end of their life. In terms of life extension, the effect was minimal.

Dr. Sinatra also conducted his own research and found that CoQ10 given to both younger and older mice resulted in increased energy and vigor. Older mice traveled through mazes quicker, they had better memory, and had more locomotor activity than those who did not get CoQ10. So CoQ10 definitely appears to improve the quality of life, even if it may not significantly increase longevity per say. For more information and dosage recommendations, please see this previous CoQ10 article.

4. Fermented Foods / Probiotics

It's quite clear that eating a diet consisting of high amounts of processed foods will shorten your life, yet 90 percent of the money Americans spend on food is spent on processed food, and the number one source of calories in the US comes from high fructose corn syrup – a staple ingredient in nearly all processed foods, from frozen dinners, to condiments, snacks, and soda. Researchers have even discovered that genetic mutations and malfunctions that cause disease are created in future generations when highly processed and artificial foods are consumed!

Part of the problem is that these processed, sugar- and chemical-laden foods effectively destroy your intestinal microflora. Your gut flora has incredible power over your immune system, which, of course, is your body's natural defense system. Antibiotics, stress, artificial sweeteners, chlorinated water and many other factors can also reduce the amount of probiotics (beneficial bacteria) in your gut, which can predispose you to illness and premature aging. Ideally, you'll want to make traditionally cultured and fermented foods a staple in your daily diet.

You can use a probiotic supplement, but getting your probiotics from food is definitely better as you can consume far more beneficial bacteria, in many cases up to 100X more. Fermented vegetables are an excellent alternative as they are both delicious and simple to make. In the following video, Caroline Barringer discusses the process of fermenting your own vegetables in some detail, so if you're up for fermenting some of your own foods, please listen to this interview.

Download Interview Transcript
5. Krill Oil

According to Dr. Richard Harris, an expert on omega-3 fats, those who have an omega-3 index of less than four percent age much faster than those with indexes above eight percent. Therefore, your omega-3 index may also be an effective marker of your rate of aging. According to Dr. Harris' research, omega-3 fats appear to play a role in activating telomerase, which, again, has been shown to be able to actually reverse telomere shortening.

Although this research is preliminary, I would suggest that optimizing your omega-3 levels above eight percent would be a good strategy if you're interested in delaying aging. (Your doctor can order the omega-3 index test from a lab called Health Diagnostic Laboratory in Richmond, Virginia.) After all, you have nothing to lose and a lot to gain by doing so, since omega-3 has proven to be extremely important for your health in so many respects.

My favorite animal-based omega-3 is krill oil, as it has a number of benefits not found in other omega-3 supplements such as fish oil. Aside from higher potential for contamination, fish oil supplements also have a higher risk of suffering oxidation damage and becoming rancid. Dr. Rudi Moerck has discussed these risks at great length in a previous interview. Krill oil also contains naturally-occurring astaxanthin, which makes it nearly 200 times more resistant to oxidative damage compared to fish oil.

Additionally, according to Dr. Harris' research, krill oil is also more potent gram for gram, as its absorption rate is much higher than fish oil. You get somewhere between 25 to 50 percent more omega-3 per milligram when you take krill oil compared to fish oil, hence you don't need to take as much.

6. Vitamin K2

Vitamin K may very well be "the next vitamin D" as research continues to illuminate a growing number of benefits to your health. While most people get enough vitamin K from their diets to maintain adequate blood clotting, they're NOT enough to offer protection against more serious health problems. For example, research over the past few years suggest that vitamin K2 can provide substantial protection from prostate cancerviii, which is one of the leading causes of cancer among men in the United States. And research results are similarly encouraging for the benefits of vitamin K to your cardiac health:

In 2004, the Rotterdam Study, which was the first study demonstrating the beneficial effect of vitamin K2, showed that people who consume 45 mcg of K2 daily live seven years longer than people getting 12 mcg per dayix.

In a subsequent study called the Prospect Studyx, 16,000 people were followed for 10 years. Researchers found that each additional 10 mcg of K2 in the diet results in 9 percent fewer cardiac events.

K2 is present in fermented foods, particularly cheese and the Japanese food natto, which is by far the richest source of K2.

7. Magnesium

According to the featured researchxi, magnesium also plays an important role in DNA replication, repair, and RNA synthesis, and dietary magnesium has been shown to positively correlate with increased telomere length in women. Other research has shown that long term deficiency leads to telomere shortening in rats and cell cultures. It appears the lack of magnesium ions has a negative influence on genome integrity. Insufficient amounts of magnesium also reduce your body's ability to repair damaged DNA, and can induce chromosomal abnormalities. According to the authors, it's reasonable to hypothesize that "magnesium influences telomere length by affecting DNA integrity and repair, in addition to its potential role in oxidative stress and inflammation."

8. Polyphenols

Polyphenols are potent antioxidant compounds in plant foods, many of which have been linked to anti-aging benefits and disease reduction. Here are but a few examples of these potent antioxidant compounds:

* Grapes (resveratrol) — Resveratrol deeply penetrates the center of your cell's nucleus, giving your DNA time to repair free radical damage. Research dating back to 2003 showed that resveratrol, a powerful polyphenol and anti-fungal chemical, was able to increase the lifespan of yeast cells.xii

The findings showed that resveratrol could activate a gene called sirtuin1, which is also activated during calorie restriction in various species. Since then studies in nematode worms, fruit flies, fish, mice, and human cells have linked resveratrol to longer lives.

Resveratrol is found in grapes, and there are numerous products on the market containing resveratrol. I recommend looking for one made from Muscadine grapes, and that uses WHOLE grape skins and seeds, as this is where many of the benefits are concentrated.
* Cacao — Quite a few studies have confirmed the potent antioxidant properties, and subsequent health benefits, of raw cocoa powder. Dark, organic, unprocessed chocolate has been found to benefit your glucose metabolism (diabetic control), blood pressure, and cardiovascular health.
* Green tea — Polyphenols in tea, which include EGCG (epigallocatechin gallate) and many others, have been found to offer protection against many types of cancer. The polyphenols in green tea may constitute up to 30 percent of the dry leaf weight, so, when you drink a cup of green tea, you're drinking a fairly potent solution of healthy tea polyphenols.

Green tea is the least processed kind of tea, so it also contains the highest amounts of EGCG of all tea varieties. Keep in mind, however, that many green teas have been oxidized, and this process may take away many of its valuable properties. The easiest sign to look for when evaluating a green tea's quality is its color: if your green tea is brown rather than green, it's likely been oxidized.

My personal favorite is matcha green tea because it contains the entire ground tea leaf, and can contain over 100 times the EGCG provided from regular brewed green tea.

9. Folate (aka Vitamin B9, or Folic Acid)

According to the featured study in the Journal of Nutritional Biochemistry, plasma concentrations of the B vitamin folate correspond to telomere length in both men and women. Folate plays an important role in the maintenance of DNA integrity and DNA methylation, both of which influence the length of your telomeresxiii.

It is useful for preventing depression, seizure disorders and brain atrophy. In fact, folate deficiency can lead to elevated homocysteine levels, which can be a major contributor to heart disease and Alzheimer's disease. One unfortunate and preventable reason why some believe folate numbers are slipping is the increased prevalence of obesity, which negatively affects the way most peoplemetabolize this important vitamin. The ideal way to raise your folate levels is to eat plenty of fresh, raw, organic leafy green vegetables, and beans.

Please note that it is the natural folate from food that has been found to be beneficial. This may not be true for the supplement folic acid.

10. Vitamin B12

Vitamin B12 is fittingly known as "the energy vitamin," and your body requires it for a number of vital functions. Among them: energy production, blood formation, DNA synthesis, and myelin formation. (Myelin is insulation that protects your nerve endings and allows them to communicate with one another.) Unfortunately, research suggests about 25 percent of American adults are deficient in this vitally important nutrient, and nearly half the population has suboptimal blood levels.

Vitamin B12 is found almost exclusively in animal tissues, including foods like beef and beef liver, lamb, snapper, venison, salmon, shrimp, scallops, poultry and eggs. It's not readily available in plants, so if you do not eat meat or animal products you are at risk of deficiency. The few plant foods that are sources of B12 are actually B12 analogs. An analog is a substance that blocks the uptake of true B12, so your body's need for the nutrient actually increases.

If you aren't getting sufficient B12 in your diet, I recommend you begin supplementation immediately with this vital nutrient with either an under-the-tongue fine mist spray or vitamin B12 injections. Ensuring your body has adequate B12 can vastly improve the quality of your life and prevent debilitating, even life-threatening diseases which result from a deficiency of this all-important nutrient.

11. Curcumin (Turmeric)

Curcumin — the active ingredient in the spice turmeric—acts both as an immune booster and potent anti-inflammatory. But perhaps its greatest value lies in its anti-cancer potential, and it has the most evidence based literature backing up its anti-cancer claims of any other nutrient. It affects over 100 different pathways once it gets into a cell—among them, a key biological pathway needed for development of melanoma and other cancers.

The spice actually stops laboratory strains of melanoma from proliferating and pushes the cancer cells to commit suicide by shutting down nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-kB), a powerful protein known to induce abnormal inflammatory response that leads to an assortment of disorders such as arthritis and cancer.

To get the full benefits that curcumin has to offer, you will want to look for a turmeric extract with at least 95 percent curcuminoids that contains only 100 percent certified organic ingredients. The formula should be free of fillers, additives and excipients (a substance added to the supplement as a processing or stability aid), and the manufacturer should use safe production practices at all stages: planting, cultivation, selective harvesting, and then producing and packaging the final product. This previous article can provide you further details on how to use curcumin.

12. Vitamin A

According to the featured study in the Journal of Nutritional Biochemistry, telomere length is positively associated with dietary intake of vitamin A in women who do not take multivitaminsxiv. It plays an important role in your immune response, and if you're deficient, you become predisposed to infections that can promote telomere shortening. However, vitamin A does not appear to have a dose-dependent effect on telomere length, so you don't need high amounts.

Two Additional Lifestyle Strategies that Affect Telomere Length

While a nutritious diet accounts for about 80 percent of the benefits derived from a healthy lifestyle, exercise cannot be ignored, and there's evidence suggesting that exercise protects against telomere shortening as well. Yet another lifestyle strategy that can have a beneficial impact is intermittent fasting.

* Exercise — One recent study on post-menopausal women suffering from chronic stress found that "vigorous physical activity appears to protect those experiencing high stress by buffering its relationship with telomere length (TL)." xv In fact, among the women who did not exercise, each unit increase in the Perceived Stress Scale was related to a 15-fold increase in the odds of having short telomeres. Those who did exercise regularly showed no correlation between telomere length and perceived stress!

High-intensity exercise appears to be the most effective all-natural approach to slow down the aging process by reducing telomere shortening. In fact, research has shown there's a direct association between reduced telomere shortening in your later years and high-intensity-type exercisesxvi: Greta Blackburn's book The Immortality Edge: Realize the Secrets of Your Telomeres for a Longer, Healthier Lifexvii further details the importance of high-intensity exercise to prevent telomere shortening.
* Intermittent Fasting — Previous research has shown that you can extend your lifespan by reducing your caloric intake, and I've written about this technique in the past. The problem is that most people do not understand how to properly cut calories, because in order to remain healthy, you have to cut out the right kind of calories—namely carbohydrates. Research by Professor Cynthia Kenyon has shown that avoiding carbs will activate genes that govern youthfulness and longevity.

But the health benefits of calorie restriction can also be achieved by intermittent fasting (keep in mind you still need to cut out sugars and grains). For more detailed recommendations and guidance on intermittent fasting, or scheduled eating, please see this recent article that greatly expands on this complex topic, and highlights the precautions, as it certainly isn't for everyone.

References:

* iThe Journal of Nutritional Biochemistry October 2011
* ii American Journal of Clinical Nutrition March 11, 2009: 89(6); 1857-1863.
* iii American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 86(5), 1420-1425, November 2007
* ivThe Organic & Non-GMO Report July 21, 2011
* vWei Sheng Yan Jiu/Journal of Hygiene Research September 2011;40(5):551-4.
* viUSNutra.com Astaxanthin
* viiConsumerLab.com, Supplement Use Report 2010
* viiiAmerican Beekeeping Federation
* ixNimptsch K, Rohrmann S and Linseisen J. "Dietary intake of vitamin K and risk of prostate cancer in the Heidelberg cohort of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC-Heidelberg)" Am J Clinical Nutrition April 2008;87(4):985-992
* x Daniels, S. "Vitamin K2, but not K1, effective for heart health benefits: Study" NutraIngredients.com February 12, 2009
* xiThe Journal of Nutritional Biochemistry October 2011
* xii Nature, Red wine ingredient makes yeast live longer, HelenR. Pilcher
* xiiiThe Journal of Nutritional Biochemistry October 2011
* xivThe Journal of Nutritional Biochemistry October 2011
* xvPLoS One. 2010 May 26;5(5):e10837.
* xviMechanisms of Ageing and Development, February 2010;131(2):165-7.
* xvii The Immortality Edge: Realize the Secrets of Your Telomeres for a Longer, Healthier Life by Greta Blackburn

[DrJonescaptain of 1,000]

Getting the stress out:
By Dr. Mercola

Nearly one-quarter of Americans report being under extreme stress, rating their stress levels an 8, 9, or 10 out of a 10-point scale for the American Psychological Association’s (APA) 2011 Stress in America survey.i

Countless others deal with fluctuating stressors each and every day, but a disturbing trend has emerged: more U.S. adults say their stress is increasing instead of decreasing.

Of course, chronic stress – the kind that eats away at you over time, such as relationship troubles or fear of losing your job – is linked to serious emotional and physical impairments, including the development of chronic diseases like heart disease, depression, high blood pressure and obesity.

Unfortunately, while 94 percent of adults believe that stress can contribute to the development of major illnesses, only 29 percent say they are doing an excellent or very good job at preventing themselves from succumbing to it.ii

In the slideshow above you can read about 10 simple steps to help you de-stress, from the Harvard Health Beat. Below I’ve added several others to add to your arsenal as well.

What’s Causing All of This Stress?

You can probably rattle off a list of your own stressors without much trouble – and chances are they’re not too much different from those revealed by the APA’s latest survey. While money, work and the economy continue to be the most common sources for stress among Americans (for five years and counting), personal and family health concerns are increasingly being listed, which makes having effective stress reduction techniques that much more important.

The fact is, you can't separate your physical health from the emotions caused by life circumstances such as these. Every feeling you have affects some part of your body. And stress can wreak havoc even if you're doing everything else "right."

Extreme, sudden stress like the loss of a loved one or a job can have near-immediate impacts on your health, but so too can lingering everyday stressors that we all juggle, particularly when they're not dealt with over time. This causes your body to remain in "fight or flight" mode for far too long -- much longer than was ever intended from a biological standpoint.

One of the most common consequences of this scenario is that your adrenal glands, faced with excessive stress and burden, become overworked and fatigued. This can lead to a number of related health conditions, including fatigue, autoimmune disorders, skin problems and more. Stress has also been linked to cancer by acting as a pathway between cancerous mutations, potentially triggering the growth of tumors. In fact, stress, and by proxy your emotional health, is a leading factor in virtually any disease or illness you can think of.

Are Your Stress-Relief Techniques Doing More Harm Than Good?

Keeping your stress levels under control has to be an ongoing commitment, like preparing healthy meals and exercising. Unfortunately, many fall into a vicious trap where their strategies for dealing with stress center on unhealthy activities, like watching TV, drinking alcohol, or eating junk foods.

The APA reports:iii

“Year after year, the Stress in America survey paints a picture of a nation at a critical crossroads when it comes to stress and health. Overall, Americans appear to be caught in a vicious cycle where they manage stress in unhealthy ways, and seemingly insurmountable barriers prevent them from making the lifestyle or behavioral changes necessary for good health.

Findings from the 2011 survey found that several groups of people in particular — caregivers and those living with chronic illness — are at heightened risk of experiencing serious consequences of stress that is too high and appears to be taking a toll on their emotional and physical health.”

The more you rely on unhealthy coping mechanisms, the worse your symptoms of stress are likely to become, as methods like drinking or binge eating are only distractions designed to make you temporarily forget your stress. As soon as the drink or candy bar is gone, your stress will return, and may even be intensified. This can prompt even more unhealthy behaviors; for instance, 44 percent of survey respondents reported lying awake at night due to stress, while 39 percent reported overeating or eating unhealthy foods. Not surprisingly, a large number of people are suffering deeply due to stress with the symptoms that follow.

More Healthy Strategies to Send Your Stress Packing …

In addition to the 10 strategies in the above slideshow, I cannot stress enough (pun intended!) how important a healthy diet and exercise program are for your mental well-being. When you exercise, your body naturally increases the levels of endorphins, or “feel good” hormones, in your brain, while nourishing your body with healthy foods will give you the energy to fight back against stress (for instance, B vitamins are known to help ease feelings of anxiety and vitamin C may help lower stress hormone levels).

In addition, my favorite overall tool to manage stress is EFT (Emotional Freedom Technique), which is like acupuncture without the needles. It's a handy, free tool for unloading emotional baggage quickly and painlessly, and so easy that even children can learn it. Other common stress-reduction tools with a high success rate include prayer, meditation, laughter and yoga, for example. Learning relaxation skills, such as deep breathing and positive visualization, which is the "language" of the subconscious.

When you create a visual image of how you'd like to feel, your subconscious will understand and begin to help you by making the needed biochemical and neurological changes.

Still others, as reported by the APA survey as being “believed to be effective among those who use them” are as follows. Choose whichever one (or a combination of them) that appeals to you, and if you don't sense any benefits, try another, until you find what works best for you.

References:

* i American Psychological Association 2011 Stress in America Survey
* ii American Psychological Association, The Impact of Stress
* iii American Psychological Association 2011 Stress in America Survey

[DrJonescaptain of 1,000]

I have a relative who suffers from epilectic attacks, so this one comes close to home: Vitamin D3 to counteract epilepsy! evidence-based.

Correction of This Vitamin Deficiency Shown to Improve Seizure Control in Epilepsy

May 12 2012 | 10,597 views
_________________________
Story at-a-glance

* When epileptic patients improved their vitamin D levels, their seizures were reduced by an average of 40%
* One patient who had extremely low vitamin D levels, and averaged 450 seizures in three months, reduced the seizures to 30 after raising vitamin D levels
* People with epilepsy face an even greater risk of vitamin D deficiency than the general population, as seizures may interfere with your ability to get outdoors and stay active, which can limit your exposure to the sunlight necessary for producing vitamin D; also, anti-epileptic drugs can interfere with vitamin D metabolism, further exacerbating the deficiency
* The IDEAL way to optimize your vitamin D levels is through appropriate sun or safe tanning bed exposure, although a vitamin D3 supplement is better than no vitamin D at all
__________________________


By Dr. Mercola

Nearly half of people with epilepsy are also vitamin D deficient,i, but despite this well-known association, only a single study has been published on the effect of vitamin D for seizure control in the last 40 years.

That study revealed that treating epileptic patients with vitamin D2 – the far inferior type of synthetic vitamin D – reduced the number of seizures, and in 1974 researchers concluded that “the results may support the concept that epileptics should be treated prophylactically with vitamin D.“ii

Now, nearly four decades later researchers have again revealed that “the normalization of serum vitamin 25(OH)D [vitamin D] level has an anticonvulsant [anti-seizure] effect.”iii

Improving Vitamin D Levels Reduces Seizures by 40%

In the latest study, researchers administered a one-time 40,000-200,000 IU dose of vitamin D3 to patients with epilepsy in order to bring their vitamin D levels out of a deficiency state.

The participants, who ranged in age from 10-42, had vitamin D levels ranging from 4 ng/ml to 34 ng/ml, with a median level of 11.8. This is an absolutely dangerously low level. As you can see in the chart below, anything below 50 ng/ml is a deficiency state.

vitamin d levels

After the treatment dose of vitamin D, the participants’ vitamin D levels did improve to a range of 23-45 ng/ml, with a median of 38 ng/ml. It’s important to note that this is still low according to the latest science … but the improvement still resulted in a decrease in their number of seizures. If their levels were optimized further, it’s likely the results would improve even more.

After increasing their vitamin D levels, the results showed:

* 10 of the 13 subjects had a decrease in number of seizures
* Overall, there was a median seizure number reduction of 40%
* A seizure reduction of greater than 50% was experienced in five patients

The most revealing result, however, occurred among the person whose vitamin D was a dangerously low 4 ng/ml at the start of the study. This person had 450 seizures in a three-month period, but after raising vitamin D level to 43.1 ng/ml, the seizures dropped to 30 in three months! The study did have some limitations, namely the small number of subjects and the lack of a placebo to compare to, but it still highlighted the importance of correcting vitamin D deficiency in epilepsy patients.

Epilepsy Patients are at Increased Risk of Vitamin D Deficiency

The findings are even more important given that people with epilepsy face an even greater risk of vitamin D deficiency than the general population (and even the general population is vastly vitamin D deficient). The reasons are two-fold, with the first being that having frequent seizures may interfere with your ability to get outdoors and stay active.

If you spend most of your time inside, you’ll miss out on regular sun exposure, which is key for the natural production of vitamin D. Even exposing your skin to sunlight through a windowpane will prevent the entry of the UVB rays, which are the specific wavelength that produces vitamin D in your skin. So, it is crucial that you get outside and experience direct skin contact with the sunlight instead of sunning in a sunroom, for instance.

Second, anti-epileptic drugs that are often given to epilepsy patients can interfere with vitamin D metabolism, leading to deficiency. If you take these drugs, it is especially crucial that you actively monitor your vitamin D levels to avoid this side effect.

Why might vitamin D have such a significant impact on epileptic seizures? Epilepsy is a disorder of the central nervous system, particularly your brain. Vitamin D is not "just" a vitamin; it's actually a neuroregulatory steroidal hormone that influences nearly 3,000 different genes in your body. Vitamin D receptors can be found in your brain, spinal cord, and central nervous system, and may enhance the amount of important chemicals in your brain needed to protect brain cells, for starters.

The Study Used Supplements, But Sunshine is Better

Researchers used a one-time large dose of vitamin D3 to boost the participants’ vitamin D levels. If you’re going to supplement, vitamin D3 is certainly far superior to the vitamin D2 researchers used back in the 1970s.

Today, however, vitamin D2 is still the form typically prescribed by doctors, so be aware of this if you’re taking this nutrient in prescription form. A meta-analysis of 50 clinical trials looking at mortality rates for “doctor recommended” synthetic vitamin D2 supplements versus natural vitamin D3 shows a 6 percent risk reduction among those who used D3, compared to a 2 percent increased risk among those who used D2.

Research also shows vitamin D3 is approximately 87 percent more potent in raising and maintaining vitamin D concentrations and produces 2- to 3-fold greater storage of vitamin D than does D2. D3 is also converted into its active form 500 percent faster. So by all means use vitamin D3 if you’re going to supplement, not D2 – but even better, simply get out in the sun, or use a safe tanning bed.

The IDEAL way to optimize your vitamin D levels is through appropriate sun or safe tanning bed exposure. While your skin does create vitamin D3 in response to sunlight, which is theoretically the same as the D3 you get from an oral supplement, there's cause to believe that the vitamin D created from sun exposure may have additional health benefits. Plus, you cannot overdose when getting your vitamin D from sun exposure, as your body has the ability to self-regulate and only make what it needs. You do, however, need to be cautious and avoid burning.

If you cannot get your vitamin D requirements from sun exposure, I recommend using a safe tanning bed (one with electronic ballasts rather than magnetic ballasts, to avoid unnecessary exposure to EMF fields). Safe tanning beds also have less of the dangerous UVA than sunlight, while unsafe ones have more UVA than sunlight. If neither of these are feasible options, then you should take an oral vitamin D3 supplement. It will certainly be better than no vitamin D at all, but you will need to monitor your levels via blood testing to ensure you stay within the therapeutic range.

You can learn more about maximizing your vitamin D from safe sun exposure in the video below. If you have epilepsy, it’s possible that doing so could help you decrease seizure drugs (a very good thing, since all seizure drugs can increase your risk of suicidal thoughts and behaviors, and some of these drugs can make you lose your memory and your hair).

References:

* i American Epilepsy Society 61st Annual Meeting: Abstract 3.337. November 30-December 4, 2007.
* ii Br Med J. 1974 May 4;2(5913):258-9.
* iii Epilepsy & Behavior April 11, 2012

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/artic ... _DNL_art_2

[DrJonescaptain of 1,000]

Dr. Mercola notes that certain drugs are prescribed to be taken FOR LIFE. In this way, Big Pharma makes Big Bucks -- and engenders a type of "Medical Slavery", for life.

By Dr. Mercola

What would you say if you knew someone had killed 60,000 people? Would you call it a felony of the worst kind, times 60,000? If you totaled up the value of all those lives in criminal court, what would you say they're worth?

Billions? Trillions?

Or—how about a measly $321 million in exchange for a guilty plea to a misdemeanor? When you consider that this involves the second-largest drug maker in the U.S.—Merck—and its deadly drug Vioxx, then you'll probably agree that a misdemeanor and a $321 million fine amounts to nothing more than a slap on the wrist.

Business analysts were estimating a $25 billion judgment when the drug was taken off the market, but even when combined with the $4.85 billion in payouts to patients who suffered heart attacks and strokesi, the final bill is nowhere close to original estimates of the damage.

Yet that's the plea agreement Merck recently made with a federal court in Boston on April 19ii, after being charged with illegal promotion of Vioxx for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, before it was approved for that use.

The sad tale brings up memories of what I tried to warn readers about in 1999, when I showed that people taking this drug were at a massively increased risk of dying from heart disease and stroke. It's tragic that Vioxx was removed only AFTER 60,000 people died.

It's even more tragic that a court would consider Merck's illegal promotion of the drug a misdemeanor rather than a felony, since this tactic clearly exposed far more people to the dangerous drug than it would have otherwise. And, adding insult to injury, instead of the billions that Merck anticipated paying out, it got away with such a paltry sum.

Hired Writers Responsible for Some of Merck's Vioxx Studies?

Particularly galling is the fact that these deaths could have been so easily avoided, were it not for the deceptive maneuvering of parties who stood to profit handsomely from the success of the drug.

Ghostwriting has become an increasingly troublesome problem in the medical science community, and the Vioxx debacle is a perfect example of why ghostwriting medical research is a devious practice that needs to be rooted out.

Merck has previously acknowledged that it has been known to hire professional writers to develop research-related documents that eventually get published under the name of reputable leaders in the medical community. Critics rightfully doubt the validity of such research, and question the actual involvement of the scientists listed as authors of these ghostwritten papers.

Back in 2008, Dr. Joseph S. Ross of New York's Mount Sinai School of Medicine came across ghostwritten research studies for Vioxx while reviewing documents related to lawsuits filed against Merck.

According to an April 16, 2008 article on MedHeadlinesiii:

"In about 96 journal publications, Ross and his colleagues discovered internal Merck documents and e-mail messages pertaining to clinical study reports and review articles, some of which were developed by the company's marketing department, not its scientific department. In others, there is little evidence that the authors recruited for the report made substantial contribution to the research itself. ... Some of the authors listed in the Merck study reports of concern... question the true nature of ghostwriting. One neurologist originally listed as "External author?" and then listed as Dr. Leon J. Thal, of the University of California, San Diego in the final draft, died a year ago in an airplane crash."

An editorial published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA)iv that year by Drs. Psaty and Kronmal also questioned whether Merck might have deliberately manipulated dozens of academic documents published in the medical literature, in order to promote Vioxx under false pretenses.

Blockbuster Drugs Tend to Be More Unnecessary than Others

Vioxx was a so-called blockbuster drug—a designation given to extremely popular drugs that generate a minimum of $1 billion in annual sales. Vioxx was marketed in more than 80 countries, and pulled in $2.5 billion in worldwide sales in 2003 alone (the year before it was pulled from the market due to its heart risks). So despite paying out fines in various lawsuits over the drug, Merck certainly made enough from it to cover all such expenses and still make obscene profits while patients were dying in droves.

An important strategy for creating a true blockbuster drug—at least in the United States—is the use of direct to consumer advertising.

A little over 20 years ago direct-to-consumer advertising for drugs was not allowed in the US. Drug advertising is still illegal in most countries around the world, except for the US. If Big Pharma wanted to sell a product, they had to do it through the person prescribing it—your doctor. If a physician didn't have time to listen to sales reps or attend conferences where new drugs were pushed, well then, sometimes they just didn't get pushed on you.

But ever since drug advertising became legal in the U.S., Big Pharma has been making big bucks selling you pills that not only are expensive, but intended to keep you hooked on them for life. As with most advertised consumer products, drugs with blockbuster potential are not necessarily important life-saving drugs. No, rather than curing actual disease, these drugs tend to be focused on the treatment of symptoms—symptoms that many people tend to experience, and which may or may not be caused by a particular disease...

Oftentimes, symptom complexes will be given official-sounding designations, to make it appear more like an actual disease. Either way, since these types of drugs cannot cure anything, they must be taken indefinitely—until you die or cannot afford them anymore. According to Melody Petersen, author of Our Daily Medsv:

"Most blockbusters are pills for conditions such as anxiety, high cholesterol or constipation that must be taken daily, often for months or years. They are designed for rich Americans who can afford to buy them."

6 Kinds of Pills Big Pharma Tries to Get You Hooked on for Life

There are two effective marketing strategies employed by drug companies on a regular basis, and they include:

1. Convincing you that drugs you used to take only when you needed them are now everyday "prevention" necessities in the form of a prescription; and
2. Selling you the idea that just being at risk for a chronic disease makes you someone who should be taking a drug for the disease.

What makes these two strategies so successful is that by seeing the advertisement, YOU are the one who sells it to your doctor, by suggesting that you need a certain drug, or outright asking for it. According to a recent article by Martha Rosenbergvi:

"Since direct-to-consumer drug advertising debuted in the late 1990s, the number of people on prescription drugs -- especially prescription drugs for life -- has ballooned. Between 2001 to 2007 the percentage of adults and children on one or more prescriptions for chronic conditions rose by more than 12 million, reports the Associated Press and 25 percent of US children now take a medication for a chronic conditionvii. Seven percent of kids take two or more daily drugs.

Who says advertising doesn't work? Of the top-selling drugs in 2011viii, led by Lipitor, Nexium, Plavix, Advair Diskus, Abilify, Seroquel, Singulair and Crestor, none is taken occasionally, or "as needed" and the treatment goal is never to get off the drug, like an antibiotic."

She lists six types of drugs that are "marketed for perpetuity," meaning they're intended to be taken for life. Sadly most of these drugs come with potential side effects that can be far worse than your original symptom, and few of them have been definitively proven to actually provide any significant health benefits. In fact, some of these drugs have been found to worsen the very condition they're meant to treat (such as antidepressants, statins, proton pump inhibitors, and asthma-control meds), and/or cause other serious diseases. For more information, please follow the hyperlinks provided:
ADHD Drugs and Drugs for Pediatric Psychopathologies, such as "pediatric bipolar disorder"

Antidepressants
Statins
Hormone Replacement Therapy Proton Pump Inhibitors (PPIs) Asthma-Control Medicines

Bribery, Fraud, and Deception Hurts YOU in More Ways than One...

Unfortunately, all of this medical deception (and at times outright fraud) is part and parcel of a much larger problem: the near unchecked system of corporate bribery that drives our political processes.

The pharmaceutical industry is the BIGGEST political lobby in the U.S.. There should be no doubt about the power the drug industry wields in shaping the U.S. health care system and all the laws relating to the industry. Political lobbying is one of the primary reasons why the drug companies control nearly the entire health industry, and why alternative medicine is under such constant legislative attack. For greater insight into this problem, please review this previous article, featuring a 60-Minutes segment with Jack Abramoff, a former lobbyist.

In recent news, we get further indications of how pervasive lobbying fraud and illegalities are.

In a submission to the Internal Revenue Service under the Tax Whistleblower Act, a nonpartisan advocacy organization, Common Causeix, has exposed what amounts to a tax scam run by a legislative group known as ALEC, for some of American's largest companies. ALEC stands for the American Legislative Exchange Council, which describes as a public-private partnership between member legislators and business leaders.

According to legal papers filed with the IRS, Common Cause believes that ALEC's lobbying efforts for "model" legislation are tailored to boost the profits of its corporate members—a violation of its tax-exempt status. While ALEC claims it doesn't do lobbying, the Huffington Post reports that at least one state, South Carolina, has written a special exemption for ALEC so it can engage in a type of lobbying. The whistleblower letter to the IRS reads in part:

"... This matter concerns the massive underreporting of lobbying by the American Legislative Exchange Council ("ALEC"). While ostensibly a nonprofit organization under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, ALEC's primary purpose is to provide a vehicle for its corporate members to lobby state legislators and to deduct the costs of such efforts as charitable contributions. ALEC drafts "model" legislation provided by its corporate and legislative members, and lobbies for the adoption of that legislation. These goals are fundamentally inconsistent with ALEC's claimed tax-exempt status as a charitable organization under 26 U.S.C. § 501(c)(3), because (i) "no substantial part" of a charity's activity can be "attempting to influence legislation," and (ii) ALEC's activities do not qualify under any of the enumerated purposes of Section 501(c)(3).

This scheme causes harm to taxpayers in two distinct ways. First, ALEC's activities constitute an abuse of its 501(c)(3) tax exemption, which is reserved for organizations "operated exclusively " for a limited number of purposes, such as "religious, charitable, scientific ... or educational purposes ...." 26 U.S.C. § 501(c)(3).

Second, ALEC's corporate members improperly deduct from their taxable income the dues and other contributions made to ALEC; such expenditures are non-deductible lobbying expenses under Section 162(e). In fact, because ALEC solicits very few contributions from individuals, its false claims of tax-exempt status appear driven by the desire of ALEC corporate members to deduct lobbying expenses as charitable contributions..."

Why are Soldiers Dying in Their Sleep?

While lobbying may have its place—when done in a transparent and legal way to inform legislators, and not to simply buy their votes by any means necessary—the practice has deteriorated to the point that it is endangering the health and welfare of people everywhere. Dangerous drugs are brought to market and used in lieu of harmless alternatives, and polypharmacy, the taking of too many drugs, is becoming ever more dangerous.

A case in point is the growing problem of U.S. soldiers literally dying in their sleep...

They survived the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. But instead of bombs and guns, a growing number of U.S. veterans of these wars, whether they're still deployed or back at home, are being downed by something else. They die in different ways but they all have one thing in common—at the time of their deaths they're on a cocktail of drugs prescribed for them by military doctors.

Video description: CNN Reports on military personnel dying from drug toxicity.

Such deaths have been occurring for years, but they were recently brought to light by a West Virginia couple who shared the story of their son, Andrew White, with ABC News. Andrew died in 2008 of fatal drug intoxication. The Whites blame the prescriptions their son was on for his death. According to a report by ABC11x:

""We call it the lethal cocktail. It's antidepressants, antipsychotics and analgesics. It's just overloading, and your body can't take it," Stan [White] explained. The Whites said Andrew was taking Seroquel, Klonopin, and Paxil. They still have the pills prescribed by Veteran's Administration doctors to treat Andrew's post-traumatic stress disorder... "He made that choice to trust the VA and that trust cost him his life," [Mrs. White] continued."

The twist to the story is that within weeks of Andrew's death, three other war veterans—all of whom were taking the same drugs Andrew was on—also died in their sleep. It seemed like too much of a coincidence to San Diego neurologist Dr. Fred Baughman, so he combed newspaper articles and obituaries and created a list of 300 military deaths linked to sudden cardiac arrest. Surprisingly, they were all men in their 20's, many of whom died quietly in their beds. According to Dr. Baughman, these deaths appear to be caused by the antipsychotics and antidepressants these young men were all taking.

Just weeks before White died, U.S. Surgeon General Eric B. Schoomaker had also publicly acknowledged that the military was experiencing a series of deaths that "often (were) a consequence of the use of multiple prescription and nonprescription medicines and alcohol." Antipsychotics and antidepressants have been linked to many of the deaths. Another family who has stepped forward with their story is John and Mary Nahas, who nearly lost their son Michael after he returned from Iraq. ABC11 reports:

"Look at all the drugs they had him on," Mary said, showing ABC11 cameras a list that includes Oxycodone, Xanax, Percocet, Klonopin, Celexa, Lunesta, and Ambien.

"I ran the list of medications by my niece - who was a psychologist in a psychiatric hospital - and she said: 'Oh Mary, that's a cocktail of death, they're trying to kill him,'" said Mary. "When they returned our son to us, he looked like a concentration camp victim. He was thin. He was gray in color," she continued. The Nahas say the medication prescribed for their son's PTSD made him attempt suicide."We noticed a decline in his personality from the drugs. They change cognition and behavior. We noticed anger, just couldn't think straight," said Mary. "The drugs had messed him up so badly."

The Veterans Administration investigated Andrew White's death and ruled that his doctors had done nothing wrong, as they met "the community standards of care." Sadly, just as with conventional cancer treatment, the "standard of care" is oftentimes just as deadly as the disease... Still, the White's are pushing for a Congressional investigation into the overmedication of military service personnel. They want VA doctors to reduce their reliance on toxic drugs, and focus on other therapies such as counseling and outdoor activities.

I couldn't agree more.

There's a mountain of evidence supporting the use of such alternatives, and there's very strong evidence that some alternative treatments, such as exercise, are FAR more effective than any of the drugs currently in use. For more information about this, please listen to my interview with Robert Whitaker, author of Mad in America, and Anatomy of an Epidemic: Magic Bullets, Psychiatric Drugs and the Astonishing Rise of Mental Illness in America.

References:

* i The New York Times November 10, 2007
* ii Reuters April 19, 2012
* iii MedHeadlines April 16, 2008
* ivJAMA 2008;299(15):1813-1817
* v AlterNet April 26, 2012
* vi AlterNet April 26, 2012
* vii The Wall Street Journal December 28, 2010
* viii Forbes Magazine April 19, 2011
* ix Common Cause April 20, 2012
* x WTVD-TV Raleigh-Durham April 26, 2012

[DrJonescaptain of 1,000]

Another excellent article by Dr Mercola, encouraging us to make our OWN medical decisions, to take control and responsibility for our own health -- and that of loved ones in OUR stewardship.

Note how important this is. And is directly related to accepting the responsibility that goes along with moral agency which Heavenly Father has given to each of us individually.

""He made that choice to trust the VA and that trust cost him his life,"

Exactly.

[DrJonescaptain of 1,000]

Today from Dr. Mercola: Farmaggedon.

Look, he is stating factual instances of the government working to stifle small farms, apparently in support of Big Ag, but not in support of the people.
______________________

By Dr. Mercola

In its latest move against small farmers who dare to operate outside the umbrella of CAFOs (confined animal feeding operations) and Monsanto-dominated crops, the U.S. government has seized $70,000 from a small dairy farmer in Maryland. The feds did this under the "Bank Secrecy Act," which requires that paperwork be filled out for any cash deposit in excess of $10,000.

The farmers, Randy Sowers and his wife Karen, made deposits totaling more than $295,000 from May 2011 to February 2012, but each transaction was less than $10,000.

Now they are being accused of "structuring," a violation of federal currency reporting requirements, as the feds are accusing them of deliberately depositing money in increments of less than $10,000 in an attempt to evade Currency Transaction Reporting requirements.

Government Seizes $70,000 On What Grounds?

The dairy farmer's "crime" stems from his weekly sales at local farmers' markets. The sales averaged about the same amount each week and, dutifully, the Sowers deposited them. They'd reportedly never even heard of the Bank Secrecy Act or "structuring," but that was of no interest to the feds—the consistency of the amount the Sowers deposited, always less than $10,000, raised red flags to the feds, who claimed that this was indicative of a crime.

The government promptly seized about $70,000 from the bank account, then issued a warrant for the seizures. As reported by Food Freedom News:i

"The Dept. of Justice has since sued to keep $63,000 of the Sowers' money, though they committed no crime other than maintaining their privacy. Without funds, they will be unable to make purchases for the spring planting. When a similar action was taken against Taylor's Produce Stand last year, the feds seized $90,000, dropped the charges, and kept $45,000 of Taylor's money.

Knowing that most farms operate on a very thin margin, such abuse of power wipes out a family's income, and for a bonus, the feds enhance the monopoly power of Monsanto, Big Dairy and their supply chain.… Former Maryland assistant U.S. attorney Steven Levin told the paper [City Paper], "The emphasis is on basically seizing money, whether it is legally or illegally earned. It can lead to financial ruin for business owners, and there's a potential for abuse here by the government.""

The raid on the Sowers was conducted by an agency created in 2009 to go after money-laundering criminals. The agency started out with a bang by seizing $1.2 billion from a real money launderer, but it appears that what it's interested in now is making criminals out of small business persons, including small farmers.

Why Are Family Farms Under Attack?

If they're not seizing bank accounts, it seems the government will find other ways to attack small farmers. A family farm in rural Michigan—and possibly others—may be shut down by a new state law that designates certain breeds of hogs as a threat to neighboring hog breeders and croplands.

Basically, the fight is over the definition of feral hogs vs. domestic hogs. The dictionary definition of "feral" refers to an animal running wild. But Michigan authorities have taken it a step further and extended the definition to include enclosed private hunting preserves and small farms that house what authorities call an "invasive species" of hogs.

There is no genetic test to determine whether the species on these farms are truly invasive, so authorities are basing their cases against these farmers solely on visual observations. The Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) uses this vague description to describe the prohibited hogs, and makes it clear that this does not apply to the domestic hogs raised on CAFOs:ii

"Wild boar, wild hog, wild swine, feral pig, feral hog, feral swine, Old world swine, razorback, eurasian wild boar, Russian wild boar (Sus scrofa Linnaeus). This subsection does not and is not intended to affect sus domestica involved in domestic hog production."

Other descriptions supplied by the MDNR include such a wide variety of characteristics that virtually any pig other than the familiar pink domestic breed raised on CAFOs could potentially be deemed "feral":

* Erect or folded/floppy ear structure
* Straight or curly tail
* Solid black, wild/grizzled, solid red/brown, black and white spotted, or black and red/brown spotted coat colorations
* "Other characteristics" not currently known to the MDNR

Interestingly, the Big Pork industry has been planning this anti-feral pig campaign for years, and even bragged about it in a 2010 newsletter.iii It was the same newsletter where they declared a win against the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) in Ohio, where HSUS was seeking legislation to end the practice of sow gestation stalls (cages so small the sow can't turn around or move).

What this means for residents of Michigan is that soon they will be unable to purchase sustainably and humanely grown meat from the Mangalitsa "wooly" hogs raised on Baker's Green Acres farm. This particular breed is being raised by only a handful of small farms across the country; whereas more than 2 million pigs are slaughtered each week in the United States, only about 50 of them are Mangalitsas (which have been called the "it" pig by the New York Times, as several high-end restaurants and specialty markets have featured the rich, naturally raised meativ).

But, of course, this issue is about much more than pasture-raised pork from a heritage breed ... it's about your ability, your right, to purchase and consume pure, unadulterated food – a right that continues to be threated for those living in the United States.

FDA Also Threatens Your Right to Food Choice …

Another glaring example of government going out of its way to prohibit your access to pure, unprocessed food is the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) war against raw milk. When the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund (FTCLDF) filed a lawsuit against the FDA over their raw milk ban, stating that banning raw milk in interstate commerce is unconstitutional, the FDA rebutted with the following extremely concerning and outrageous statements:

* "There is no absolute right to consume or feed children any particular food."
* "There is no 'deeply rooted' historical tradition of unfettered access to foods of all kinds."
* "Plaintiffs' assertion of a 'fundamental right to their own bodily and physical health, which includes what foods they do and do not choose to consume for themselves and their families' is similarly unavailing because plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to obtain any food they wish."
* FDA's brief goes on to state that "even if such a right did exist, it would not render FDA's regulations unconstitutional because prohibiting the interstate sale and distribution of unpasteurized milk promotes bodily and physical health."
* "There is no fundamental right to freedom of contract."

Since when did the FDA have authority to tell you what you can and cannot eat and feed your children? Apparently they believe they've had it all along. If you go by these assertions, it means the FDA has the authority to prohibit any food of their choosing and make it a crime for you to seek it out. If, one day, the FDA deems tomatoes, broccoli or cashews capable of causing you harm (which is just as ludicrous as their assertions that raw milk is harmful), they could therefore enact such a ban and legally enforce it.

What this means is that freedom of food choice is a myth if you live in the United States, and this simply is not acceptable. No one, and certainly not any government agency, should be able to restrict your access to pure, unadulterated food, but the dairy industry and other industrial farmers that depend on CAFOs employ powerful lobbyists will stop at nothing to persuade government to remove the small farmers from the market entirely. The truth is, if enough people start demanding naturally, sustainably and humanely raised meat, dairy and produce, the giant farming monopolies that currently dominate the market would not be able to compete.

Their businesses depend on pesticides, CAFOs, genetically modified seeds, growth hormones and the like … so when they see all-natural creameries like the one operated by Randy Sowers and his wife Karen, or natural farms like Bakers Green Acres gaining loyal and growing customer bases, they get nervous – and they get the government involved in any way they can.

Please Support Your Local Small Farms

The healthiest food choices are nearly always those that come from responsible, high-quality, sustainable sources.

This is why I encourage you to support the small family farms in your area. This includes not only visiting the farm directly, if you have one nearby, but also taking part in farmer's markets and community-supported agriculture programs. Now that summer is almost here in the United States, fresh produce and other wonderful whole foods are available in abundance. Not only is the food so much tastier and healthier when you get it from sustainable, non-CAFO sources, but there is something about shopping for fresh foods in an open-air, social environment that just feels right. An artificially lit, dreary supermarket -- home to virtually every CAFO food made -- just can't compete.

If you want to experience some of these benefits first-hand, here are some great resources to obtain wholesome food that supports not only you but also the environment:

1. Alternative Farming Systems Information Center, Community Supported Agriculture (CSA)
2. Farmers' Markets -- A national listing of farmers' markets
3. Local Harvest -- This Web site will help you find farmers' markets, family farms, and other sources of sustainably grown food in your area where you can buy produce, grass-fed meats, and many other goodies.
4. Eat Well Guide: Wholesome Food from Healthy Animals -- The Eat Well Guide is a free online directory of sustainably raised meat, poultry, dairy, and eggs from farms, stores, restaurants, inns, and hotels, and online outlets in the United States and Canada.
5. Community Involved in Sustaining Agriculture (CISA) -- CISA is dedicated to sustaining agriculture and promoting the products of small farms.
6. FoodRoutes -- The FoodRoutes "Find Good Food" map can help you connect with local farmers to find the freshest, tastiest food possible. On their interactive map, you can find a listing for local farmers, CSA's, and markets near you.

Finally, for more information on the ongoing attacks against small family farms in the United States consider watching Farmageddon: The Unseen War on American Family Farms, a documentary by Kristin Canty. But I warn you … the injustices it contains may just make your blood boil.

References:

* i Food Freedom News April 23, 2012
* ii Michigan Department of Natural Resources December 13, 2011
* iii Michigan Pork 2010
* iv NYTimes.com December 29, 2010

[Reginacaptain of 10]

Another interesting post DrJones, thank you

[DrJonescaptain of 1,000]

You're welcome, Regina. I like this Dr Mercola!

Today: how to keep the brain active and young...

By Dr. Mercola

Looking for ways to boost your intellect, stave off mental aging, and maybe even live a longer life? You might be surprised to learn that not only do such strategies exist, but many are easily attainable by making simple tweaks here and there to your daily routine. Embracing the strategies that follow may give a hearty boost to your brainpower, help you keep mentally healthy and ultimately even make yourself smarter.

Nine Tips for a Smarter You …

1. Exercise

Exercise encourages your brain to work at optimum capacity by causing nerve cells to multiply, strengthening their interconnections and protecting them from damage. During exercise nerve cells release proteins known as neurotrophic factors. One in particular, called brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), triggers numerous other chemicals that promote neural health, and directly benefits cognitive functions, including learning. Further, exercise provides protective effects to your brain through:

* The production of nerve-protecting compounds
* Greater blood flow to your brain
* Improved development and survival of neurons
* Decreased risk of cardiovascular diseases such as stroke

A 2010 study on primates published in Neurosciencei also revealed that regular exercise not only improved blood flow to the brain, but also helped the monkeys learn new tasks twice as quickly as non-exercising monkeys, a benefit the researchers believe would hold true for people as well.

Still more research has shown that exercise boosts mitochondria, organelles that produce energy within every cell of your body, which suggests exercise may help your brain work faster and more efficiently.ii

To get the most out of your workouts, I recommend a comprehensive program that includes Peak Fitness high-intensity exercise, strength training, stretching, and core work.

2. Animal-Based Omega-3 Fats

Docosahexaenoic acid, or DHA, an omega-3 fat, is an essential structural component of both your brain and retina. Approximately 60 percent of your brain is composed of fats—25 percent of which is DHA. DHA is also an essential structural ingredient of breast milk, which is believed to be a major reason why breastfed babies consistently score higher on IQ tests than formula-fed babies.

Omega-3 fats such as DHA are considered essential because your body cannot produce it, and must get it from your daily diet. DHA-rich foods include fish, liver, and brain—all of which are no longer consumed in great amounts by most Americans.

DHA is found in high levels in your neurons -- the cells of your central nervous system, where it provides structural support. When your omega-3 intake is inadequate, your nerve cells become stiff and more prone to inflammation as the missing omega-3 fats are substituted with cholesterol and omega-6 instead. Once your nerve cells become rigid and inflamed, proper neurotransmission from cell to cell and within cells become compromised.

The influence of omega-3 fat on physical and mental health has been the subject of intense research over the last four decades, and there's compelling evidence that animal-based omega-3 fats can help reduce the symptoms of a variety of psychiatric illnesses and degenerative brain disorders. For example, low DHA levels have been linked to memory loss and Alzheimer's disease.

Even more exciting is research showing that degenerative conditions can not only be prevented but also potentially reversed. For example, in one study, 485 elderly volunteers suffering from memory deficits saw significant improvement after taking 900 mg of DHA per day for 24 weeks, compared with controls.iii

Another study found significant improvement in verbal fluency scores after taking 800 mg of DHA per day for four months compared with placebo.iv Furthermore, memory and rate of learning were significantly improved when DHA was combined with 12 mg of lutein per day.

Interestingly, research suggests that the unsaturated fatty acid composition of normal brain tissue is age-specific, which could imply that the older you get, the greater your need for animal-based omega-3 fat to prevent mental decline and brain degeneration.

To compensate for our inherently low omega-3 diet, a high quality animal-based omega-3 supplement is something that I recommend for virtually everyone, especially if you're pregnant. I prefer krill oil compared to all other animal-based omega-3's, because while the metabolic effects of krill oil and fish oil are "essentially similar," krill oil is as effective as fish oil despite the fact that it contains less EPA and DHA.v This is because krill oil is absorbed up to 10-15 times as well as fish oil, due to its molecular composition, and is less prone to oxidation (rancidity) because it is naturally complexed with the potent fat-soluble antioxidant astaxanthin.

3. Sleep

Sleep is not only essential for regenerating your physical body, but it is imperative for reaching new mental insights and being able to see new creative solutions to old problems. Sleep removes the blinders and helps "reset" your brain to look at problems from a different perspective, which is crucial to creativity.

Research from Harvard indicates that people are 33 percent more likely to infer connections among distantly related ideas after sleeping, but few realize that their performance has actually improved. Sleep is also known to enhance your memories and help you "practice" and improve your performance of challenging skills. In fact, a single night of sleeping only four to six hours can impact your ability to think clearly the next day.

The process of growth, known as plasticity, is believed to underlie the brain's capacity to control behavior, including learning and memory. Plasticity occurs when neurons are stimulated by events, or information, from the environment. However, sleep and sleep loss modify the expression of several genes and gene products that may be important for synaptic plasticity. Furthermore, certain forms of long-term potentiation, a neural process associated with the laying down of learning and memory, can be elicited in sleep, suggesting synaptic connections are strengthened while you slumber.

As you might suspect, this holds true for infants too, and research shows that naps can give a boost to babies' brainpower. Specifically, infants who slept in between learning and testing sessions had a better ability to recognize patterns in new information, which signals an important change in memory that plays an essential role in cognitive development.vi Even among adults, a mid-day nap was found to dramatically boost and restore brainpower.vii You can find 33 tips to help you get the shut-eye you need here.

4. Coconut Oil

One of the primary fuels your brain needs is glucose, which is converted into energy. Your brain actually manufactures its own insulin to convert glucose in your bloodstream into the food it needs to survive.

If your brain's production of insulin decreases, your brain literally begins to starve, as it's deprived of the glucose-converted energy it needs to function normally. This is what happens to Alzheimer's patients -- portions of their brain start to atrophy, or starve, leading to impaired functioning and eventual loss of memory, speech, movement and personality.

In effect, your brain can begin to atrophy from starvation if it becomes insulin resistant and loses its ability to convert glucose into energy. Fortunately, your brain is able to run on more than one type of energy supply, and this is where coconut oil enters the picture.

There's another substance that can feed your brain and prevent brain atrophy. It may even restore and renew neuron and nerve function in your brain after damage has set in.

The substance in question is called ketone bodies or ketoacids. Ketones are what your body produces when it converts fat (as opposed to glucose) into energy, and a primary source of ketone bodies are the medium chain triglycerides (MCT) found in coconut oil! Coconut oil contains about 66 percent MCTs. Therapeutic levels of MCTs have been studied at 20 grams per day. According to research by Dr. Mary Newport, just over two tablespoons of coconut oil (about 35 ml or 7 level teaspoons) would supply you with the equivalent of 20 grams of MCT, which is indicated as either a preventative measure against degenerative neurological diseases, or as a treatment for an already established case.

Everyone tolerates coconut oil differently, so you may have to start slowly and build up to these therapeutic levels. My recommendation is to start with one teaspoon, taken with food in the mornings. Gradually add more coconut oil every few days until you are able to tolerate four tablespoons. Coconut oil is best taken with food, to avoid upsetting your stomach.

5. Vitamin D

Activated vitamin D receptors increase nerve growth in your brain, and researchers have also located metabolic pathways for vitamin D in the hippocampus and cerebellum of the brain, areas that are involved in planning, processing of information, and the formation of new memories.

The National Institutes of Mental Health recently concluded that it is vital that the mother get enough vitamin D while pregnant in order for the baby's brain to develop properly. The child must also get enough vitamin D after birth for "normal" brain functioning. In older adults, too, research has shown that low vitamin D levels are associated with poorer brain function, and increasing levels may help keep older adults mentally fit.viii

Appropriate sun exposure would take care of these issues, as the sun is irreplaceable when it comes to the body's ability to produce adequate amounts of vitamin D.

Appropriate sun exposure is all it takes to keep your levels where they need to be for healthy brain function. If this is not an option, a safe tanning bed is the next best alternative, followed by a vitamin D3 supplement. It now appears as though most adults need about 8,000 IU's of vitamin D a day in order to get their serum levels above 40 ng/ml, which is the lowest they should be. Ideally, your serum levels should be between 50-70 ng/ml, and up to 100 ng/ml to treat cancer and heart disease. However, it's important to realize that there's no magic dosage when it comes to vitamin D. What's important is your serum level, so you need to get your vitamin D levels tested to make sure you're staying within the optimal and therapeutic ranges as indicated below.

vitamin d levels

6. Optimize Your Gut Flora

Your gut is your "second brain," and your gut bacteria transmits information to your brain via the vagus nerve, the tenth cranial nerve that runs from your brain stem into your enteric nervous system (the nervous system of your gastrointestinal tract). There is a close connection between abnormal gut flora and abnormal brain development, and just as you have neurons in your brain, you also have neurons in your gut -- including neurons that produce neurotransmitters like serotonin, which is also found in your brain and is linked to mood.

Quite simply, your gut health can impact your brain function, psyche, and behavior, as they are interconnected and interdependent in a number of different ways.

Your gut bacteria are an active and integrated part of your body, and as such are heavily dependent on your diet and vulnerable to your lifestyle. If you consume a lot of processed foods and sweetened drinks, for instance, your gut bacteria are likely going to be severely compromised because processed foods in general will destroy healthy microflora and sugars of all kinds feed bad bacteria and yeast. Limiting sugar and processed foods, while eating traditionally fermented foods (rich in naturally occurring good bacteria), taking a probiotic supplement and breastfeeding your baby are among the best ways to optimize gut flora and subsequently support brain health.

Download Interview Transcript

7. Vitamin B12

Vitamin B12, or rather a lack thereof, has been called the "canary in the coalmine" for your future brain health, and recent research has bolstered the importance of this vitamin in keeping your mind sharp as you age. According to the latest research, people with high levels of markers for vitamin B12 deficiency were more likely to score lower on cognitive tests, as well as have a smaller total brain volume,ix which suggests a lack of the vitamin may contribute to brain shrinkage.

Mental fogginess and problems with memory are two of the top warning signs that you have vitamin B12 deficiency, and this is indicative of its importance for your brain health.

In addition, a Finnish study found that people who consume foods rich in B12 may reduce their risk of Alzheimer's in their later years.x For each unit increase in the marker of vitamin B12 (holotranscobalamin) the risk of developing Alzheimer's was reduced by 2 percent. Research also shows that supplementing with B vitamins, including B12, helps to slow brain atrophy in elderly people with mild cognitive impairment (brain atrophy is a well-established characteristic of Alzheimer's disease).xi

Vitamin B12 deficiency is widespread and many have trouble absorbing this nutrient properly from food sources. Blood tests for vitamin B12 are not always a reliable indicator of B12 status, so watching for symptoms of deficiency and increasing your dietary and supplemental intake is a practical alternative to blood testing.

B12 is available in its natural form only in animal food sources. These include seafood, beef, chicken, pork, milk, and eggs. If you don't consume enough of these animal products (and I don't recommend consuming seafood unless you know it is from a pure water source) to get an adequate supply of B12, or if your body's ability to absorb the vitamin from food is compromised, vitamin B12 supplementation is completely non-toxic and inexpensive, especially when compared to the cost of laboratory testing. I recommend an under-the-tongue fine mist spray, as this technology helps you absorb the vitamin into the fine capillaries under your tongue.

8. Listen to Music

It's long been theorized that listening to music may boost your brainpower; you've probably heard of this with the "Mozart Effect," which suggests listening to classical music can make you smarter. Indeed, research has shown that listening to music while exercising boosted cognitive levels and verbal fluency skills in people diagnosed with coronary artery disease (coronary artery disease has been linked to a decline in cognitive abilities). In this study, signs of improvement in the verbal fluency areas more than doubled after listening to music compared to that of the non-music session.xii

Listening to music has also been associated with enhanced cognitive functioning and improved mental focus among healthy adults, so take advantage of this simple pleasure whenever you can.

9. Challenge Your Mind

One of the simplest methods to boost your brain function is to keep on learning. The size and structure of neurons and the connections between them actually change as you learn. This can take on many forms above and beyond book learning to include activities like traveling, learning to play a musical instrument or speak a foreign language, or participating in social and community activities.

Another important method? Brain aerobics. As with learning, challenging your brain with mind-training exercises can keep your brain fit as you age. This can be something as simple as thinking of famous people whose first names begin with the letter A, doing crossword puzzles or playing board games that get you thinking. Research has even shown that surfing the Web activates regions in your brain related to decision-making and complex reasoning.xiii So unlike passively watching TV, using the Internet is an engaging task that may actually help to improve your brainpower.

References:

* i Neuroscience. 2010 Jun 2;167(4):1239-48.
* ii Journal of Applied Physiology February 15, 2012 vol. 112 no. 4 552-559
* iii Alzheimer's and Dementia 2010 Nov;6(6):456-64
* iv Nutritional Neuroscience 2008 Apr;11(2):75-83
* v Lipids. 2011 Jan;46(1):37-46
* vi Psychological Science August 2006; 17(8): 670
* vii American Association of the Advancement of Science (AAAS) annual meeting, San Diego, California, February 21, 2010
* viii J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2009 Jul;80(7):722-9.
* ix Neurology. 2011 Sep 27;77(13):1276-82.
* x Neurology. 2010 Oct 19;75(16):1402-3.
* xi PLoS ONE 5(9): e12244.
* xii Heart Lung. 2003 Nov-Dec;32(6):368-73.
* xiii Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2009 Feb;17(2):116-26.

[DrJonescaptain of 1,000]

Dr Mercola does not like GMO foods by Monsanto, at all. Today a disclosure regarding Kashi foods by Kellogg, etc:

By Dr. Mercola

A simple sign on a grocery store shelf has gone viral, causing a storm of outrage among consumers who feel they've been misled by cereal maker Kellogg's claims about its Kashi cereals. A Rhode Island grocer posted a note on the shelf where Kashi was supposed to be, saying he'd learned it wasn't 100 percent natural after all, and therefore wasn't carrying it anymore.

It turns out the soy in Kashi cereals comes from genetically modified Roundup-ready soybeans, which have a gene inserted in them that allows the crop to withstand otherwise lethal doses of the weed killer.

USA Today reported that consumers felt duped into believing that Kashi was all-natural when it's noti. Their complaints were initially brushed off by Kashi general Manager David DeSouza, who told USA Today that since the FDA doesn't regulate the term "natural," the cereal maker has done nothing wrong by defining "natural" as minimally-processed with no artificial flavors, colors, preservatives or sweeteners.

Were You Duped by Kashi's Wholesome Brand Identity?

People generally tend to believe that the word "natural" refers to foods grown "in a natural way," which really amounts to organic farming methods, or close to it; sans harsh chemicals, and most definitely not something that has been genetically engineered. Unfortunately, that's not what the "natural" label represents at all. In fact, the "natural" label is unregulated, and companies can define it as they please.

But most food manufacturers are well aware of this general misperception of what the label means, and frequently misuse it to lure health conscious consumers into spending more. This is known as "green-washing" and it certainly applies in this case.

Adding insult to injury, the company appears to have made a poor attempt to save face by further misleading consumers about the accuracy of the information that led the Rhode Island grocer to not carry the Kashi brand anymore.

The Cornucopia Institute released a report, Cereal Crimes, back in November of last yearii, which details the presence of genetically engineered grains in a number of leading "natural" cereal brands, including Kellogg's Kashi brand. Shockingly, many of the products tested were found to contain high amounts of genetically engineered grains—some, including Kashi, containing 100 percent genetically engineered grains!

The report also mentions a class action lawsuit filed against Kellogg/Kashi on August 31, 2011, "for allegedly misleading consumers with its "natural" claims. One Kashi® product in particular, GoLean® Shakes, is composed almost entirely of synthetic and unnaturally processed ingredients, according to the plaintiff."

The report contrasts these findings with tests of certified organic cereal products, which by law are not allowed to contain any genetically engineered ingredients or synthetic pesticides. While some were found to be mildly contaminated with genetically engineered ingredients, overall, the report highlights the fact that the ONLY way to ensure you're not buying a genetically engineered product is to buy a product bearing the USDA 100% Organic label.

When Greenwashing Attempts Finally Backfire...

Once the grocer's sign went viral and angry consumers began overloading the Kashi telephone lines, the company switched to a recorded message stating they were temporarily unable to accept calls. Then, according to an April 26 report by Cornucopia Instituteiii:

"When the company again began accepting calls, a Kashi consumer affairs employee, Rick Duran, told a Cornucopia staff member that "no actual testing" of their cereal products had been performed. This mimicked the analysis also offered in a response by the company in an online video posted that same afternoon on the Kashi Facebook page. The video spokesperson called Cornucopia's information "scientifically inaccurate and misleading because it was not based on actual testing of Kashi products."

"This characterization of our work by Kashi is blatantly false," said Will Fantle, Cornucopia's Research Director. "We purchased a readily available box of Kashi's GoLean® cereal from a Whole Foods store. We then sent a sample to an accredited national lab for testing, finding that the soy in the natural cereal was 100% GMO."

The Kashi video also suggested, disingenuously, that any genetically engineered contamination in their food was from incidental sources rather than crops intentionally grown from GMO seed. While acknowledging that over 80% of the soybeans grown in North America are GMO, they explain that, "practices in agricultural storage, handling, and shipping, have lead to an environment where GMOs are not sufficiently controlled."

"This is classic public relations spin and crisis communications work, where corporations use misinformation to try to cover their tracks," said Rebekah Wilce, of the Center for Media and Democracy/PRWatch, which helps expose corporate PR tactics..."

Three days later, the USA Today reportediv:

"... Kellogg got itself into trouble by "not being entirely transparent," says Roger Nyhus, president of Nyhus Communications in Seattle. He sees a trend among some companies "of fudging language to allay consumer concerns and jump on the green bandwagon, and I think it's starting to backfire." ... Kashi's DeSouza says that by 2015, all new Kashi products will "contain at least 70 percent USDA organic certified ingredients."

So, in a matter of days, Kashi ended up backpedaling as their initial attempt to discredit the Cornucopia Institute's test results backfired, and now the company has agreed to ensure their products will, within the next three years, contain at least 70 percent certified organic ingredients. While this is probably not going to be enough for most health conscious consumers, Kashi's pledge is at least a good demonstration of the power of consumer education, and that consumers ultimately have the power to influence even the largest of food companies. After all, they can only sell what you're willing to buy!

"Natural" Label is Frequently Misused to Lure Health Conscious Consumers

The misuse of the term "natural" by companies who simply pay lip service to sustainability and the organic movement undermines companies that are truly sincere in their efforts to bring you eco-friendly, unadulterated, safe foods.

And companies like Kashi cannot rightfully claim ignorance about the impact the word "natural" has—marketing firm polls have shown that more people respond favorably to the "all-natural" label than the organic label! It's a powerful word that conjures up wholesomeness in most people's minds. Marketing terms such as "natural" are certainly not chosen willy-nilly. No, they're selected based on what works and what sells. As illustrated by this market research summary by The Hartman Groupv:

"Consumer understanding and shopping behavior of organic and natural foods and beverages continues to change and evolve. Today's consumers are confused, yet continue to be engaged by the vast array of products, messages, symbols and labels they encounter when making decisions about what to eat or drink and where they shop.

... This study will identify the hierarchy among these attributes and point out differences by product category as well as deeper distinctions between "organic" and "natural" themselves. It will enable companies to go beyond the clutter of product call-outs to have a singular focus on what matters most to consumers thereby increasing brand loyalty and likelihood of purchase"

According to a 2010 Hartman Group poll, more than 60 percent of consumers erroneously believe that the "natural" label implies or suggests the absence of genetically engineered ingredients, so Kashi's statement that there's nothing wrong with using genetically engineered ingredients in their "natural" products is rather weak. Food companies know this misconception exists, and they actively prey on consumers' assumptions. Fortunately, the Cornucopia Institute's report has awakened many to this sad truth. As one now-former Kashi consumer stated on the company's Facebook page:

"Yours is the only brand cereal I have bought for years. Not anymore! You are despicable. Everything you supposedly stand for is a lie."

The Difference Between Natural and Organic

It's important to understand that the "natural" label is not regulated and does not provide a guarantee of being free of genetically engineered ingredients or synthetic pesticides and additives. Currently, the ONLY label that can protect you against genetically engineered ingredients and other unsavory additives is the USDA 100% Organic label.

The USDA's National Organic Program (NOP) took effect October 21, 2002, and regulates the standards for any farm, wild crop harvesting, or handling operation that wants to sell an agricultural product as organically produced. The labeling requirements of the NOP apply to raw, fresh products and processed products that contain organic agricultural ingredientsvi. In order to qualify as organic, a product must be grown and processed using organic farming methods that recycle resources and promote biodiversity.

Crops must be grown without synthetic pesticides, bioengineered genes, petroleum-based fertilizers, or sewage sludge-based fertilizersvii. Organic livestock must have access to the outdoors and cannot be given antibiotics or growth hormones.

* Products labeled "USDA 100% organic" must contain only organically produced materials
* Products labeled simply "USDA organic" must contain at least 95 percent organic ingredients, whereas
* The label "made with organic ingredients" can contain anywhere between 70 to 95 percent organic ingredients

Organic products cannot be irradiated, are not allowed to contain preservatives or flavor enhancing chemicals, nor can they contain traces of heavy metals or other contaminants in excess of tolerances set by the FDAviii. Additionally, the pesticide residue level cannot be higher than 5 percent of the maximum EPA pesticide toleranceix. For the complete National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances under the USDA organic label, see this linkx. To learn more about organic foods and the findings detailed in the Cereal Crimes report, please listen to my interview with Mark Kastel of the Cornucopia Institute.

Download Interview Transcript

Mom Stands Up to Monsanto and Wins Major Environmental Award

Genetically engineered foods do not just pose a health hazard for those consuming them. GE crops also threaten the health of the environment and those living in GE farming communities, due to the heavy use of pesticides required to grow these crops.

A woman in Argentina who was instrumental in getting the president of Argentina to investigate the connection between pesticide use and the incidence of cancer and other devastating illnesses and deaths in her town has been awarded the 2012 Goldman Environmental Prize—the world's largest prize honoring grassroots environmentalists. The Goldman recognizes unsung heroes who often take great personal risks to work to protect the world's natural resources and human lives.

Thirteen years ago Sofia Gatica gave birth to a daughter who died three days later of kidney failure. Determined to learn what killed her child, she learned that the people in her working-class neighborhood, surrounded by genetically engineered soy fields and subjected to regular insecticide spraying, were plagued with unexplained health issues including high rates of neurological and respiratory diseases, birth defects, and infant mortality. Even though she faced an uphill battle and death threats, Gatica succeeded in getting a municipal ordinance passed prohibiting aerial spraying around her town. Argentina's Supreme Court followed with a ruling that not only banned chemical spraying near populated areas, but ordered the government and soy producers to prove the chemicals are safe.

The Devastating Health Effects of Roundup

As of July 2013, Argentina will no longer allow the use of endulsofan, an off-patent organochlorine insecticide, and Gatica is currently involved with an effort to enact a nationwide ban on glyphosate as well. Glyphosate is the active ingredient in Monsanto's broad-spectrum herbicide Roundup, which is used on all genetically engineered Roundup-Ready crops, which have been genetically altered to withstand otherwise lethal doses of the chemical.

Glyphosate is easily one of the world's most overlooked poisons. Research published in 2010 showed that the chemical, which works by inhibiting an enzyme called EPSP synthase that is necessary for plants to grow, causes birth defects in frogs and chicken embryos at far lower levels than used in agricultural and garden applicationsxi. The malformations primarily affected the:

* Skull
* Face
* Midline and developing brain
* Spinal cord

The amount of glyphosate residue you can be exposed to through food is remarkably high, in terms of being close to the maximum residue limit (MRL) allowed. According to a report in the journal Chemical Research in Toxicology, the highest MRL for glyphosate in food and feed products in the EU is 20 mg/kg. Genetically engineered soybeans have been found to contain residue levels as high as 17 mg/kg, and malformations in frog and chicken embryos occurred at 2.03 mg/kg!xiiThat's 10 times lower than the MRL. Other independent scientific research has also found that glyphosate has the potential to cause grave health damage, including a 2009 study that tested formulations of Roundup that were highly diluted (up to 100,000 times or more) on human cells, and even then the cells died within 24 hours.xiii

Why We MUST Insist on Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods

Labeling may be the only way to stop the proliferation of genetically engineered foods in the U.S,, but simple petitions will likely fail. We strongly support state initiatives, such as California's ballot initiative to require labeling for genetically engineered foods sold in their state. A coalition of consumer, public health and environmental organizations, food companies, and individuals has already submitted the California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act to the State Attorney General, and thousands of volunteers have done an outstanding job collecting the required signatures.

Now, the campaign needs funding. Needless to say, it's going to be an enormous battle, as the biotech industry will outspend us by 100 to 1, if not more, for their propaganda aimed at stopping Californians from voting it into law.

I urge you to participate in the Money Bomb Against Monsanto, which was launched on May 1. By May 26, a broad coalition of food-, farming-, health groups, and organic food manufacturers, will attempt to raise one million dollars (i.e. "The Money Bomb") to help get this law passed.

Donations can be made online, via regular snail mail, and over the phone. And to sweeten the deal further, a group of "Right to Know" public interest organizations and organic companies have pledged to match the first million dollars raised in this nationwide "Drop the Money Bomb on Monsanto Campaign." So please, help us raise two million dollars to win this historic campaign!

You can donate online, by phone, or by dropping a check in the mail.

Donate Today!

References:

* i USA Today April 29, 2012
* ii Cornucopia Institute, Cereal Crimes Report, October 11, 2011
* iii Cornucopia Institute April 26, 2012
* iv USA Today April 29, 2012
* v Hartman Group, Beyond Organic and Natural: Resolving Confusion in Marketing Foods and Beverages
* vi United States Department of Agriculture,Agricultural Marketing Service, National Organic Program, Organic Labeling and Marketing Information
* vii Food Marketing Institute, Natural and Organic Foods, Executive Summary
* viii US Food and Drug Administration, August 2000, Action levels for poisonous or deleterious substances in human food and animal feed
* ix Environmental Protection Agency, Pesticides: Health and Safety, Pesticides and Food: What the Pesticide Residue Limits are on Food
* x US Department of Agriculture, The National list of allowed and prohibited substances
* xi Chemical Research in Toxicology 2010; 23(10):1586–1595
* xii Chemical Research in Toxicology 2010; 23(10):1586–1595
* xiii Chemical Research in Toxicology 2009 Jan;22(1):97-105.

[DrJonescaptain of 1,000]

From today's information from Dr Mercola -- two natural agents that fight cancer, evidence shows:

... Resveratrol and Curcumin


The first evidence of resveratrol's anti-cancer effects was published in 1997. The findings received great interest from cancer researchers, and many studies have been devoted to this potent antioxidant since then. Resveratrol, which can be found in red wine, red grape skins, fruits, vegetables, legumes and weeds, has been found to have the following actions and functions:

* Broad-spectrum antimicrobial
* Anti-infective
* Antioxidant
* Cardio-protective
* Anti-cancer

According to the review, published in the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciencesii:

"The anticancer activities of resveratrol are mediated through modulation of several cell-signaling molecules that regulate cell cycle progression, inflammation, proliferation, apoptosis, invasion, metastasis, and angiogenesis of tumor cells. It has been shown that resveratrol can sensitize resistant cells to chemotherapeutic agents by overcoming one or more mechanisms of chemoresistance. In some tumor cells, however, resveratrol has been shown to act as chemoprotector."

The fact that it can in some cases act as a chemoprotector, meaning, it can reduce the efficacy of chemotherapeutic agents, "present a major caveat for use of resveratrol as a chemosensitizer," the authors warn. In an earlier study, the researchers concluded that using resveratrol with the cancer drug Paclitaxel, for example, was detrimental in certain types of cancers, such as breast canceriii.

Resveratrol May Help Alleviate Cancer Treatment Side Effects

In another study from last year, published in the journal Experimental Biology and Medicine, resveratrol was found to help alleviate many of the debilitating side effects of conventional cancer treatmentsiv, such as:

Cachexia (wasting syndrome) Anorexia Fatigue
Depression Neuropathic pain Anxiety
Cognitive impairment Sleep disorders Delirium (acute confusion)

The authors point out there's mounting evidence indicating that these symptoms are primarily caused by dysregulation of inflammatory pathways in your body. Hence anti-inflammatory compounds that can modulate the inflammatory pathways and influence inflammatory molecules may help improve these symptoms in cancer patients. They name several nutritional agents known to do just that, including:

* Resveratrol
* Curcumin
* Genistein
* Epigallocatechin gallate
* Lycopene

According to the authorsv:

"These nutraceuticals are chemically diverse and affect production of various inflammatory cytokines. Extensive research in recent years has indicated that chronic inflammation leads to various chronic disorders associated with cancer. A central role in the induction of chronic inflammation is played by a set of genes encoding proinflammatory cytokines such as IL-1, IL-2, IL-6, TNFa and monocyte chemotactic protein 1. What is common to all these molecules is that they are regulated by the transcription factor NFkB. This makes NFkB an appealing target for therapeutic intervention.

A number of compounds have been identified that can suppress NFkB activation, including antioxidants, protease inhibitors, proteasome inhibitors, salicylates, immunosuppressants and anti-inflammatory agents." [Emphasis mine]

This brings us to the next interesting fact about natural products like resveratrol and curcumin, namely their impact on your genetic expression. As just mentioned, your genetic expression plays a central role in chronic inflammation, and certain nutrients can have a potent protective influence by either turning genes on or off.

Understanding Epigenetics

The role of epigenetics in health and disease is becoming ever clearer, and I firmly believe this field of study will eventually supplant the current medical paradigm. The conventional belief has been that genes controlled their own expression and were therefore the direct cause of certain diseases. This laid the groundwork for the idea that your genes predetermined your health.

But genes are in fact NOT self-regulating. Having "bad genes," does not at all mean you're doomed to suffer some inevitable fate like cancer!

Genes are merely blueprints, and these blueprints are activated and controlled by something else entirely, namely their environment. This environmental information—which includes diet, toxic exposures, as well as thoughts and emotions, and more—can create more than 30,000 different variations from each blueprint, allowing for an astounding amount of leeway in modifying the expression or "read-out" of each gene. As a result of these findings, we're now finally seeing science alter its course to investigate the power of optimal nutrition to improve health and prevent chronic disease from occurring in the first place.

In May last year, a study investigating curcumin's ability to affect epigenetic regulation was published in the journal Genes & Nutritiovi. The authors write:

"Epigenetic regulation, which includes changes in DNA methylation, histone modifications, and alteration in microRNA (miRNA) expression without any change in the DNA sequence, constitutes an important mechanism by which dietary components can selectively activate or inactivate gene expression.

Curcumin, a component of the golden spice Curcuma longa, commonly known as turmeric, has recently been determined to induce epigenetic changes... [E]pigallocatechin gallate (EGCG), and resveratrol, have [also] been shown to alter epigenetic mechanisms, which may lead to increased sensitivity of cancer cells to conventional agents and thus inhibition of tumor growth." [Emphasis mine]

Curcumin—A Potent Anti-Cancer Herb

Curcumin currently has the most evidence-based literature supporting its use against cancer among all nutrientsvii. Interestingly this also includes the metabolite of curcumin and its derivatives, which are also anti-cancerous. Best of all, curcumin appears to be safe in the treatment of all cancers, and has been shown to be nontoxic. Researchers have found that curcumin can affect more than 100 different pathways, once it gets into the cell. More specifically, curcumin has been found to:

Inhibit the proliferation of tumor cells Decrease inflammation
Inhibit the transformation of cells from normal to tumor Inhibit the synthesis of a protein thought to be instrumental in tumor formation
Help your body destroy mutated cancer cells so
they cannot spread throughout your body Help prevent the development of additional blood supply necessary for cancer cell growth (angiogenesis)
Have chemosensitization activity Have radiosensitization activity

Another study from last year, published in the Natural Product Reports describes curcumin as being therapeutic for a wide range of diseases aside from cancerviii, such as:

Lung- and liver diseases Neurological diseases Metabolic diseases
Autoimmune disorders Cardiovascular diseases Inflammatory diseases

A persistent question has been: How can a single agent possess such diverse effects? Part of the answer lies in the herb's ability to affect signaling molecules. For example, curcumin has been shown to directly interact with:

Inflammatory molecules Cell survival proteins Histone
Human immunodeficiency virus type
1 (HIV1) integrase and protease DNA and RNA Various carrier proteins and metal ions

According to the authors of the NPR paperix:

"The molecular basis of a disease is related to dysregulation of an array of signaling molecules. With the advent of advanced molecular tools, we now know that over 500 different genes of the signaling pathways control any given disease. However, most currently available treatments are based on the modulation of a specific single target. Curcumin is a functionally labile molecule with the potential to modulate the biological activity of a number of signaling molecules either indirectly or directly..." [Emphasis mine]

How to Use Curcumin

To get the full benefits curcumin has to offer you need to understand that it is very poorly absorbed. You simply can't blindly choose a supplement and expect to achieve the results described in this paper. There is extensive research going on by a number of organizations to provide a commercial product.

You can look for a turmeric extract that contains 100 percent certified organic ingredients, with at least 95 percent curcuminoids. The formula should be free of fillers, additives and excipients (a substance added to the supplement as a processing or stability aid), and the manufacturer should use safe production practices at all stages: planting, cultivation, selective harvesting, and then producing and packaging the final product.

Unfortunately, at the present time there really are no concentrated commercial formulations available for the use against cancer. Keep in mind that concentrated curcumin is really only needed by people who seek to use it as a drug, in which case you need it in very high doses in order to achieve therapeutic effect. The most classic case would be those using it to treat, not prevent, cancer. If you do not have cancer, then using a turmeric supplement is sufficient.

According to Dr. William LaValley, one of the leading medicine cancer physicians I personally know, typical anticancer doses are up to three grams of good bioavailable curcumin extract, three to four times daily. One work-around is to use the curcumin powder and make a microemulsion of it by combining a tablespoon of the powder and mixing it into 1-2 egg yolks and a teaspoon or two of melted coconut oil. Then use a high speed hand blender to emulsify the powder.

Another strategy that can help increase absorption is to put one tablespoon of the curcumin powder into a quart of boiling water. It must be boiling when you add the powder as it will not work as well if you put it in room temperature water and heat the water and curcumin. After boiling it for ten minutes you will have created a 12 percent solution that you can drink once it has cooled down. It will have a woody taste. The curcumin will gradually fall out of solution however. In about six hours it will be a 6 percent solution, so it's best to drink the water within four hours. Dr. LaValley is also helping us beta test new curcumin preparations that will radically simplify this process.

Cancer Prevention 101...

It is certainly encouraging to see cancer research on herbs such as turmeric, and antioxidants like resveratrol. However, it's virtually impossible to discuss cancer prevention and treatment without touching on one of the absolute best cancer prevention nutrients ever discovered, namely vitamin D.

As a powerful neuro-regulatory steroid, vitamin D is likely more potent than curcumin, as its epigenetic influence covers more than 2,000 genes in your body—or about 10 percent of all genes! There are also more than 830 peer reviewed scientific studies showing vitamin D's effectiveness in the prevention and treatment of cancer. In terms of protecting against cancer, vitamin D has been found to offer protection in a number of ways, including:

* Regulating genetic expression
* Increasing the self-destruction of mutated cells (which, if allowed to replicate, could lead to cancer)
* Reducing the spread and reproduction of cancer cells
* Causing cells to become differentiated (cancer cells often lack differentiation)
* Reducing the growth of new blood vessels from pre-existing ones, which is a step in the transition of dormant tumors turning cancerous

Personally, I believe it is virtually malpractice to not optimize vitamin D levels when treating someone with cancer. In this case, your vitamin D levels should be around 70-100 ng/ml. For more information about optimizing your vitamin D levels, please see my previous article Test Values and Treatment for Vitamin D Deficiency.

If the notion that sun exposure can actually help prevent cancer is still new to you, I highly recommend you watch my one-hour vitamin D lecture to clear up any confusion. It's important to understand that the risk of skin cancer from the sun comes only from excessive exposure. Meanwhile, countless people around the world have an increased risk of cancer because their vitamin D levels are too low from lack of sun exposure.

Other Natural (and Epigenetic) Cancer Prevention Strategies

When it comes to cancer and other chronic diseases, effective prevention trumps progressive treatments in my eyes. I believe you can virtually eliminate your risk of ever developing cancer (and radically improve your chances of recovering from cancer if you currently have it) by following some relatively simple risk reduction strategies—all of which help promote a healthful biological environment in which your cells can thrive and combat disease naturally.

You don't read or hear much about these strategies because they have not been formally "proven" yet by conservative researchers. Beyond what's already been covered above, the remainder of my cancer prevention strategies include:

1. Reduce or eliminate your processed food, fructose and grain carbohydrate intake.
2. Control your fasting insulin and leptin levels. Normalizing your insulin levels is one of the most powerful physical actions you can take to lower your risk of cancer, and improved insulin and leptin control is the natural outcome of reducing or eliminating fructose, grains, and processed foods from your diet
3. Normalize your ratio of omega-3 to omega-6 fats by taking a high-quality krill oil or fish oil and reducing your intake of most processed vegetable oils.
4. Get regular exercise. One of the primary ways exercise lowers your risk for cancer is by reducing elevated insulin levels, which creates a low sugar environment that discourages the growth and spread of cancer cells. Controlling insulin levels is one of the most powerful ways to reduce your cancer risks. Additionally, exercise improves the circulation of immune cells in your blood. Your immune system is your first line of defense against everything from minor illnesses like a cold right up to devastating, life-threatening diseases like cancer.

The trick about exercise, though, is understanding how to use it as a precise tool. This ensures you are getting enough to achieve the benefit, not too much to cause injury, and the right variety to balance your entire physical structure and maintain strength and flexibility, and aerobic and anaerobic fitness levels. If you have limited time Peak Fitness exercises are your best bet but ideally you should have a good strength training program as well.
5. Get regular, good quality sleep.
6. Reduce your exposure to environmental toxins like pesticides, household chemical cleaners, synthetic air fresheners and air pollution.
7. Reduce your exposure to environmental toxins like pesticides, household chemical cleaners, synthetic air fresheners and air pollution.
8. Limit your exposure and provide protection for yourself from EMF produced by cell phone towers, base stations, cell phones and WiFi stations. On May 31, 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), an arm of the World Health Organization (WHO), declared that cell phones are "possibly carcinogenic to humans."x
9. Avoid frying or charbroiling your food. Boil, poach or steam your foods instead.
10. Have a tool to permanently reprogram the neurological short-circuiting that can activate cancer genes. Even the CDC states that 85 percent of disease is caused by emotions. It is likely that this factor may be more important than all the other physical ones listed here, so make sure this is addressed. Energy psychology seems to be one of the best approaches and my particular favorite tool, as you may know, is the Emotional Freedom Technique.
11. Eat at least one-third of your diet in the form of raw food.



References:

* i Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences January 2011; 1215: 150-160
* ii Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences January 2011; 1215: 150-160
* iii European Journal of Cancer July 2010;46(10):1882-91
* iv Experimental Biology and Medicine 2011, 236:658-671
* v See reference iv
* vi Genes & Nutrition May 2011 6(2): 93–108
* vii GreenMedInfo.com Curcumin Medical Literature list
* viii Natural Products Report 2011; 28: 1937-1955
* ix See reference viii
* x ElectromagneticHealth.org, WHO/IARC Classifies Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields as Possibly Carcinogenic

[DrJonescaptain of 1,000]

Today Dr M warns about pneumonia vaccinations. My daughter recently had a baby, and the hospital folk pushed her to have this shot. She did, and her shoulder where the shot went in became inflamed and so sore she could hardly sleep. After a number of days, the pain and swelling finally subsided.

As Dr M says below,

It is important for you to be brave because you might be strongly criticized for daring to talk about the "other side" of the vaccine story.

_____
By Dr. Mercola

It's estimated that nearly one in 7 U.S. adults have been diagnosed with sinusitis in the past 12 months, which occurs when the mucous membranes in your nose and sinuses become irritated.i In most of these cases (90-98%) a virus is the cause, whereas in 2-10% of cases, a bacterial infection is also present.

These bacterial infections are becoming increasingly drug-resistant and therefore harder and harder to treat, which is why the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) recently issued new treatment guidelines for sinusitis.

Alarmingly, however, buried on page 16 of their report is the acknowledgement that certain hard-to-treat bacterial infections in children are on the rise because of the widespread use of the conjugated pneumococcal vaccines!

Bacterial Infections on the Rise Since Introduction of the Pneumonia Vaccine

The IDSA report states:ii

" ... both the prevalence of H. influenzae (40%– 45%) and proportion of b-lactamase–producing H. influenzae (37%–50%) (extrapolated from middle ear fluid cultures of children with acute otitis media) have markedly increased among other upper respiratory tract infections since the widespread use of conjugated pneumococcal vaccines... Whereas S. pneumoniae was more common than H. influenzae prior to 2000, the prevalence of H. influenzae has clearly increased while that of S. pneumoniae has decreased in the post–pneumococcal vaccine era, such that currently they are approximately equal … "

In the United States the Prevnar vaccine, which is used to prevent pneumoccocal disease that can cause meningitis and bloodstream infections in young children, was licensed in 2000 and has been given to infants in four shots between the age of 2 months and 15 months. The vaccine originally covered seven and now covers 13 of the 90-odd strains of the Streptococcus bacteria.

Although pneumoccocal disease caused by seven pneumoccoal strains in the 7-valent Prevnar vaccine declined after widespread use, one pneumoccocal strain called 19A developed super resistance and is now causing pneumoccocal disease that is antibiotic-resistant.

In 2010, the FDA licensed a 13-valent pneumococcal vaccine to cover more strains, including 19A, in an attempt to interrupt transmission of pneumococcal disease, which is associated with over 80 different strains of pneumococcal. The health community has known for years that non-vaccine S. pneumoniae serotypes had not only quickly replaced the seven included in the original Prevnar vaccine, but were also causing invasive non-vaccine-type pneumonia to increase by 71 percent. Writing in the journal Emerging Infectious Disease, researchers stated:iii

"In the Netherlands, PCV-7 [the 7-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine] offered high protection against vaccine-serotype IPD in vaccinated children, but increases of non–vaccine-serotype IPD reduced net vaccine benefits."

That's the reason U.S. officials introduced the new 13-valent pneumonia vaccine—to hopefully keep the replacement serotypes at bay. However, history suggests that both antibiotics and vaccines may be intricately involved in the evolution of pneumonia superbugs.

Pneumonia Bacteria Swapped Genes Before Prevnar Hit the Market

A new analysis by a team of international researchers revealed the complete genetic makeup of 240 samples of a strain of Streptococcus pneumonia taken between 1984-2008, which allowed the researchers to note changes over time.iv The strain, known as the Pneumococcal Molecular Epidemiology Network clone 1 or PMEN1, is resistant to several antibiotics. There were several interesting revelations, including:

* The pneumonia strain emerged when penicillin was frequently used, but because it was not killed by penicillin, it flourished
* The strain changes one of its DNA nucleotides about every 15 weeks, a rate of mutation similar to that of the common antibiotic-resistant superbug MRSA
* One way the bacteria mutate is with a sugar coating called a polysaccharide capsule; PMEN1 has a capsule called 23F, which was included as a target in the Prevnar vaccine. However, by the time the vaccine hit the market, the bacteria had already morphed into a new serotype called 19A, which the vaccine did not work against.

Wired Science reported:v

"The study "illustrates that these genes are under enormous selection pressure due to human interference with antibiotics and vaccines," says Garth Ehrlich, a bacterial pathologist at the Allegheny-Singer Research Institute in Pittsburgh. Mapping the organism's past genetic contortions may not help researchers predict what the bacteria will do next, but the analysis shows that some genes are particularly prone to changes and probably are not good vaccine targets, he says."

A secondary problem is that the overuse of antibiotics for ear and sinus infections has also caused these serotypes to become resistant to antibiotics. Researchers reported in Science:vi

"More than 700 recombinations were detected, with genes encoding major antigens frequently affected. Among these were 10 capsule-switching events, one of which accompanied a population shift as vaccine-escape serotype 19A isolates emerged in the USA after the introduction of the conjugate polysaccharide vaccine. The evolution of resistance to fluoroquinolones, rifampicin, and macrolides [antibiotics] was observed to occur on multiple occasions."

Will Vaccines Leave a Legacy of Superbugs and Diseases?

Vaccines carry health risks and do not guarantee protection against contracting infectious disease. In the case of Prevnar, no long-term studies were conducted to evaluate whether it is associated with development of chronic illness or disability. And the clinical trials that were conducted by the vaccine manufacturer before the Prevnar 7 vaccine was licensed in 2000, compared one experimental vaccine (pneumococcal) against another (meningococcal), which means no true placebo was used in a control group, compromising the results. Still, children in the pneumococcal vaccine group had more seizures, high fevers and other reactions, and there were 12 deaths (including 5 labeled as Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS)) reported in the pre-licensing clinical trials.

Each dose of Prevnar vaccine contains aluminum as an adjuvant, which is used to provoke a strong immune response but is also a known neurotoxin.vii

Now it's being suggested that widespread use of the Prevnar vaccine is leading to other unforeseen consequences, like increases in bacterial infections and the emergence of antibiotic-resistant supergerms. Other vaccines also have produced serious, unintended adverse effects, such as the chicken pox vaccine, which can increase the risk of adult shingles.

It's so important to understand that your best defense against any disease is a robust healthy immune system. Vaccines can actually compromise your immune function, and this is true regardless of your age. Two of the most important factors influencing the health of your immune system are:

* Your gut flora
* Your vitamin D status

About 80 percent of your immune system resides in your gut, so maintaining a healthy gut flora is imperative for maintaining a fully functioning immune system. Also, if your child's gut is populated with too many pathogens, he or she is likely to be more prone to vaccine-induced damage. For more information about this, I highly recommend listening to my interview with Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride.

Vitamin D is another crucial component for maintaining optimal health, so I urge you to get your children's vitamin D levels tested, and, if found deficient, to follow my recommendations for optimizing their levels.

Artificially manipulating your immune system with a vaccine does not produce the same kind of lasting immunity and sought after disease-fighting results that a healthy lifestyle can. It may actually make you less healthy in the long run.

For more information about vaccines, vaccine ingredients and vaccine policies and state laws, the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) is a good place to start to do research and obtain information that you need to help you make intelligent, informed decisions about vaccination.

Share Your Story with the Media and People You Know

The media is quick to warn about the dangers of infectious diseases but rarely discuss the dangers of the vaccines against those diseases. This has created a very lopsided view of the safety of vaccines. So please, if you or a family member has suffered a serious vaccine reaction, injury or death, talk about it. If we don't share information and experiences with each other, everybody feels alone and afraid to speak up. Write a letter to the editor if you have a different perspective on a vaccine story that appears in your local newspaper, or make a call in to a radio talk show that is only presenting one side of the vaccine story.

It is important for you to be brave because you might be strongly criticized for daring to talk about the "other side" of the vaccine story. Be prepared for it and have the courage to not back down. Only by sharing our perspective and what we know to be true about vaccination will the public conversation about vaccination open up so people feel comfortable talking about these critical health issues.

We cannot allow the drug companies and medical trade associations funded by drug companies to dominate the conversation about vaccination. The vaccine injured cannot be swept under the carpet and treated like nothing more than "statistically acceptable collateral damage" of national one-size-fits-all mass vaccination policies that put way too many people at risk for injury and death. We shouldn't be treating people like guinea pigs instead of human beings.

Internet Resources Where You Can Learn More

To learn more about informed consent, the six principles for protecting your vaccine choices, and a summary of the U.S. law pertaining to vaccine exemptions, please review the article, STOP! Read This Before Vaccinating for Anything.

I encourage you to visit the following web pages on the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) website at www.NVIC.org:

* NVIC Advocacy Portal: Protect vaccine exemptions in YOUR state. Right now, legislation (AB2109) to restrict the right for Californians to file a personal belief exemption to vaccination has passed the Assembly and is in the Senate. If you are a resident of California and don't want to be forced to get a signature of a medical provider in order to file an exemption to vaccination for personal religious or conscientious beliefs, you need to act NOW!

Sign up today to use the free online interactive NVIC Advocacy Portal and stay informed so you can take immediate action when proposed legislation in your state threatens your legal right to make voluntary vaccine choices. As a Portal user, you will be put in immediate touch with your own legislators with the click of a mouse or touch on your SmartPhone screen so you can tell them what you want them to do.
* NVIC Memorial for Vaccine Victims: View descriptions and photos of children and adults, who have suffered vaccine reactions, injuries and deaths. If you or your child experiences an adverse vaccine event, please consider posting and sharing your story here.
* If You Vaccinate, Ask 8 Questions: Learn how to recognize vaccine reaction symptoms and prevent vaccine injuries.
* Vaccine Freedom Wall: View or post descriptions of harassment by doctors or government officials for making independent vaccine choices.

References:

* i Infectious Diseases Society of America December 16, 2011
* ii Infectious Diseases Society of America December 16, 2011
* iii CDC Emerging Infectious Diseases May 2010
* iv Science. 2011 Jan 28;331(6016):430-4
* v Wired Science January 28, 2011
* vi Science. 2011 Jan 28;331(6016):430-4
* vii National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) -- Pneumococcal

[DrJonescaptain of 1,000]

Interesting, about SLOW weight-training:

By Dr. Mercola

A new study examining the difference between lifting heavy weights, as opposed to a lighter load, to the point of muscle failure, has shown that there is no difference in the way your body responds to the weight usedi.

Scientists measured both muscle volume and strength gains as part of their experiment.

According to the authors:

"In accordance with our previous acute measurements of muscle protein synthetic rates a lower load lifted to failure resulted in similar hypertrophy as a heavy load lifted to failure."

This confirms what fitness experts like Dr. Doug McGuff teaches, and what I have personally been doing for some time.

The key to increase muscle and improve fitness lies in working your muscle to fatigue, but you don't need to lift heavy weights to do so.

There is a Goldilock's zone, however, where the weight is heavy enough to bring you to fatigue within a certain amount of repetitions, but not so heavy that you cannot complete the set within a minute or two.

Principles of Super-Slow Weight Training

Dr. McGuff is a proponent of so-called super-slow weight training, which actually produces many of the same health- and fitness benefits as high-intensity interval training, which is a key aspect of my Peak Fitness program.

But instead of using a stationary bike or elliptical machine, you're lifting weights . These two forms of exercise may at first sound like complete opposites—super-slow versus high-intensity—but the combination of slowing down your lifts and lifting to failure turns it into a high-intensity exercise. Metabolically speaking, both forms are very similar to each other, because you're producing metabolic byproducts of that fatigue.

One such byproduct is lactic acid.

Whether you're doing high-intensity interval training on an elliptical or doing super-slow weight lifting, the lactic acid produced generates a cascade of metabolic adaptations that improve your muscle strength and fitness level.

One of the primary differences is that during anaerobic interval training, these metabolic adaptations occur as a side effect of the activity—I've previously discussed how these types of exercises help boost and shape muscles throughout your body—but during super-slow weight training, these adaptations are a deliberate part of the goal of the exercise, which is to momentarily bring a given muscle group into deep fatigue in order to increase the strength of that muscle—and to do so within a span of 60 to 120 seconds.

How much actual muscle mass you gain depends on your individual expression of certain genes. Your genome governs how large your muscles can become, and how responsive your muscles will be to exercise. However, regardless of how large your muscles become, your body will get stronger as a result of these types of exercises. Some people can be enormously strong without looking like Schwarzenegger, and some who are very muscular might not have great strength.

Another adaptation that occurs is the improvement of your glucose storage capability. Regardless of the increase in actual muscle mass, your glucose storage capability will increase, and that is a very important factor for overall health. And, just like high-intensity interval training, super-slow weight training promotes the production of human growth hormone (HGH), aka "the fitness hormone," which plays an important role in maintaining optimal health, fitness, and longevity. In fact, according to Dr. McGuff you only need 12 minutes of Super-Slow type strength training once a week to achieve the same growth hormone production as you would with Peak Fitness!

How to Perform Super-Slow Weight Lifting

To summarize, by aggressively working your muscle to fatigue, you stimulate muscular adaptations that improve the metabolic capability of your muscle, which causes it to increase in strength and size.

Dr. McGuff recommends using four or five basic compound movements for your exercise set. These exercises can be done using either free weights or machines. The benefit of using a quality machine is that it will allow you to focus your mind on the effort rather than your form. The following five movements are a good place to start:

1. Pull-down (or alternatively chin-up)
2. Chest press
3. Compound row (A pulling motion in the horizontal plane)
4. Overhead press
5. Leg press

Next is a summary of how to perform each exercise. If you're using the appropriate amount of weight or resistance, you'll be able to perform four to eight repetitions for each exercise set. When done properly, your workout will take no more than 12 or 15 minutes.

1. Begin by lifting the weight as slowly and gradually as you can. The first inch should take about two seconds. Since you're depriving yourself of all the momentum of snatching the weight upward, it will be very difficult to complete the full movement in less than 7-10 seconds.

This super-slow movement allows your muscle, at the microscopic level, to access the maximum number of cross-bridges between the protein filaments that produce movement in the muscle. When pushing, stop about 10 to 15 degrees before your limb is fully straightened; smoothly reverse direction
2. Slowly lower the weight back down
3. Repeat until exhaustion. Once you reach exhaustion, don't try to heave or jerk the weight to get one last repetition in. Instead, just keep trying to produce the movement, even if it's not 'going' anywhere, for another five seconds or so
4. Immediately switch to the next exercise for the next target muscle group and repeat the first three steps

When Pushing to the Point of Failure is Just Too Much

For those of you who feel that pushing yourself to the point of muscle failure is just too much sometimes, there's another study out that explains that too. In this study, researchers found that the old adage, "it's all in your head" is true in that, typically, it's your mind that limits you from pushing to failure, not your bodyii. It's taken more than a century for scientists to figure this out, and to explain how your brain works in conjunction with your body to ensure that you stop exercising before physical harm develops—a key to overall improvement in your exercise routine.

The study, which is aptly titled: "Fatigue is a Brain-Derived Emotion that Regulates the Exercise Behavior to Ensure the Protection of Whole Body Homeostasis," explains that the fatigue you may experience when exercising vigorously is a mental or emotional regulator mechanism designed to protect your body from excessive harm. It may sound strange, but the explanation they offer is actually quite sensible. The authors write:

"An influential book written by A. Mosso in the late nineteenth century proposed that fatigue that "at first sight might appear an imperfection of our body, is on the contrary one of its most marvelous perfections. The fatigue increasing more rapidly than the amount of work done saves us from the injury which lesser sensibility would involve for the organism" so that "muscular fatigue also is at bottom an exhaustion of the nervous system."

It has taken more than a century to confirm Mosso's idea that both the brain and the muscles alter their function during exercise and that fatigue is predominantly an emotion, part of a complex regulation, the goal of which is to protect the body from harm... [T]he CNS [central nervous system] regulates exercise specifically to insure that each exercise bout terminates whilst homeostasis is retained in all bodily systems." [Emphasis mine.]

Furthermore, the idea that your athletic performance is based purely on your body's physiological and metabolic responses appears to be false, according to this research, because "subconscious and conscious mental decisions made by winners and losers, in both training and competition, are the ultimate determinants of both fatigue and athletic performance."

The Importance of Recovery

The idea that fatigue is an important regulatory function to maintain physical homeostasis makes the advice to make sure you fully recover between workouts even more important. This recently became a great learning experience for me.

This is a vital area of exercise and one that obsessive-compulsives like me frequently have problems with. It took me over 40 years to realize that I was working out too hard and needed to integrate more recovery into my exercise program. Obviously this is not a problem for most people that don't exercise enough but for disciplined overachievers, this is a common misunderstanding.

I'd been doing high-intensity Peak Fitness exercises three times a week for about a year along with three one-hour strength training sessions a week when I began feeling fatigued between sessions. After my interview with Dr. McGuff, I realized I was probably pushing myself too hard and not allowing myself enough recovery time.

So when should you back down on your exercise?

An important piece of information gleaned from Dr. McGuff is that as long as your intensity is high enough, you can cut back on the frequency of the exercise without diminishing the results. In fact, if the intensity is really high, the frequency may need to be reduced, in order to continue improving.

"For any interval increase in intensity, there has to be a very disproportionate decrease in frequency for it to continue to be productive," he explains.

For example, as a weak beginner, you can exercise three times a week and not put much stress on your system. But once your strength and endurance improves, each exercise session is placing an increasingly greater amount of stress on your body (as long as you keep pushing yourself to the max). At that point, you would be wise to reduce the frequency of your sessions to give your body enough time to recover in between.

According to Dr. McGuff, once you're fit, you don't need the frequent spurts of growth hormone production. At that point, recovery takes precedence as being more important, and your recovery period could be anywhere from three to seven days. In fact, he strongly recommends NOT exercising too frequently once you are in fit condition, in order to avoid over-taxing your adrenals.

Super-Slow Weight Training Automatically Decreases Risk of Injury

Since we're discussing your body's innate intelligence to prevent you from injuring yourself, by making you feel fatigued, it's worth mentioning that super-slow weight training is a much safer form of exercise than regular strength training. The slow movement actively prevents you from accidentally harming your joints or suffering repetitive use injury, as the forces are dramatically reduced.



References:

* i Journal of Applied Physiology April 19, 2012
* ii Frontiers in Physiology April 11, 2012;3:82.

[DrJonescaptain of 1,000]

China and Poland ban GMO (Monsanto -type) foods. US balks at even LABELING GMO foods.

By Dr. Mercola

The media often plays a powerful role in influencing public perceptions of controversial issues like genetically modified organisms (GMOs).

And many believe that newspapers and other media outlets provide an unbiased, independent source of information that often reflects public opinion.

In China, where debate is growing over the use of genetically modified (GM) seeds, research has revealed that newspaper coverage about GMOs is largely positive, a stance that may be misleading over a billion residents, as well as people around the globe, in implying that China is pro-GMO.

Chinese Media Portrays GMOs as Positive -- But Government Has Other Ideas

After reviewing 77 articles from two major Chinese newspapers, published between 2002 and August 2011, researchers noted that "the Chinese print media is largely supportive of GMOs."i Benefits of GM crops were discussed far more often than risks, which were actually only minimally covered, and one of the newspapers even wrote that public concerns about GM rice were "fallacious" and based on "the public's ignorance about biotechnology and the loss of confidence in government authority."

The media also highlighted the government's role, including describing the Chinese government as "actively pursuing national GMO research and development programs and the promotion of GM cotton usage."

This may sound as though China is rearing to become the next GMO superpower, but this is only part of the picture, which is why the study's authors concluded that the media, scientists and the government should work together to ensure that science communication is accurate and balanced. The Chinese media should take heed of this advice, seeing that their government drafted a plan February 21, 2012 that outlaws genetically modified grains.

China Says No to GMO Grains

A source close to the Ministry of Agriculture (MOA), told the Economic Observer that the Chinese government "will not promote the commercialization of genetically modified rice and wheat for five to ten years."ii This was based on two primary reasons:

* Questions about the safety of genetic modification
* Research on GM staple food crops in China, as well as regulations, business operations and more, are not yet mature

It's a smart move, especially considering the Chinese government's decision followed the European Union's (EU) announcement in November 2011 that the EU was requiring all Chinese rice to be certified 100 percent GM-free. This came in response to the EU's border control warning system – the Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed, which had 47 alerts about the presence of GM rice in Chinese imports in 2010 alone. Currently, the EU allows only two GM crops to be planted (a corn variety and a potato variety), although only a minimal number of states actually allow it.

And though they do allow imports of 43 GM products grown elsewhere – GM rice is not one of them.iii

As rice imports from China became increasingly contaminated with GM varieties (some of which are not even authorized in China), the EU took a more rigid measure in requiring that all such imports be certified as meeting EU GM-free rice standards. In China, currently papayas, tomatoes and bell peppers are the only commercially produced GM crops. GM rice is illegal in the country, but GM rice contaminants have been reported since 2005. As for GM corn, China is currently considering commercial planting, but other countries are taking a much more cautious stance …

Poland Bans BT Corn

Poland is the latest country to ban a GM food, in a desperate attempt to save the world's bees. Citing a link to Monsanto's GM corn and the depletion of bee colonies in the country, Poland banned the insecticide-producing MON810 corn after experts determined that the widely used insecticide may be causing colony collapse disorder. Scientists know that honeybees play a critical role in the pollination process, and that their decline could threaten the sustainability of the world's agricultural ecosystems and food supply.

That's one reason Illinois beekeeper Terrence Ingram spent the past 15 years studying the effects of Monsanto's Roundup herbicide on bee populations.

It's also the reason Ingram went to great lengths to buy bees and hives only from areas that had never been affected by Roundup. But when Ingram approached the Illinois Department of Agriculture about his concerns, instead of confirming that Roundup destroys bees, the department swooped down on his hives while he was gone, destroyed many of them and stole the rest, ruining his livelihood and 15 years of research!

Poland is the seventh European nation to announce plans to ban Monsanto’s Bt corn. France recently announced they were banning it too, along with Austria, Germany, Greece, Hungary, and Luxembourg. The European Commission, which regulates environmental decisions made in Europe, ruled France’s ban as illegal in 2011, and the country subsequently overturned it in March 2012, saying it was essential to “protect the environment.”

Now, however, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has said, again, that it will force France to lift the ban, saying there is “no scientific evidence” that shows “risk to human and animal health or the environment” (which is clearly not true). There is much more to this battle than meets the eye; in a leaked WikiLeaks cable from 2007, Craig Stapleton, who was the U.S. ambassador to France at the time, comments on France's decision to ban cultivation of GM corn:

"Europe is moving backwards not forwards on this issue with France playing a leading role, along with Austria, Italy and even the [European] Commission... Moving to retaliation will make clear that the current path has real costs to EU interests and could help strengthen European pro-biotech voice. ...

Country team Paris recommends that we calibrate a target retaliation list that causes some pain across the EU since this is a collective responsibility, but that also focuses in part on the worst culprits. The list should be measured rather than vicious and must be sustainable over the long term, since we should not expect an early victory."

This is pretty much conclusive proof that the U.S. government is working toward Monsanto's pro-GM goals, and it may now be having an impact in the European Union. Fortunately, Poland’s agriculture minister said European law allows for a national ban, and his country intends to go through with it. Polish law already forbids the trading of GMO seeds; it is the cultivation of them—which specifically is not yet banned—that Poland is now targeting.

As the debate over GM safety and ethics grows, other countries are also making a stand. In the Philippines, for instance, Greenpeace and public officials asked the Supreme Court to stop the field testing of a GM variety of Bt eggplant, which they fear could spur the growth of superweeds as well as pose harm to humans. The Supreme Court responded favorably, and it appears Bt eggplant may be permanently banned.

You Can Make MAJOR Difference In Making Choice Possible and Labeling GMOs

Before I continue, I want to bring your attention to an issue of great importance, and that is the California ballot initiative to mandate labeling of genetically engineered foods. We only have a few short months left to really shift the tide against genetically engineered foods in the US, and we need your help. This concerns all Americans, not just Californians, because a win for the California Initiative would most likely have the same impact as a national law, due to the size of their market. The initiative has already collected the 800,000 signatures needed to get the Act on this year's ballot. Now it's time to campaign, and the Initiative needs both volunteers and funds to stand a chance against the deep pockets of the biotech industry that does NOT want a labeling requirement for their wares.

I urge you to get involved and help in any way you can:

* If you live in California and want to get involved, please contact LabelGMOs.org. Pamm Larry will go through all volunteer requests to put you into a position that is suitable for you, based on your stated interests and location
* No matter where you live, please help spread the word in your personal networks, on Facebook, and Twitter. For help with the messaging, please see LabelGMOs.org's "Spread the Word!" page
* Whether you live in California or not, please donate money to this historic effort, either through the LabelGMOs.org, or the Organic Consumers Fund

Why Is a Plague of 'Super Weeds' Taking Over U.S. Farmland?

An insidious army of "super weeds" is taking over U.S. farmlands, and even Monsanto's best-selling herbicide Roundup can't stop it. Actually, it's Roundup, coupled with the excessive planting of Roundup-Ready GM crops, that's caused the problem in the first place. Like the old axiom, "life finds a way," the weeds Roundup targets have found a way to resist Roundup's powerful poisons, making them stronger and more prolific than ever.

It's a problem that's helped some of the worst weeds grow more than 6 feet tall as they've attacked and taken over more than 12 million acres of prime U.S. farmland, primarily afflicting the very crops Roundup was supposed to protect―corn and soybeans. We'll probably never know whether Monsanto knew in advance that Roundup would only contribute to creating Frankenstein-like super weeds. But now that it's happened, farmers who once embraced the genetically modified Roundup Ready seeds and their companion herbicide are begging for relief and a solution to their woes.

Sadly, one of Monsanto's competitors, Dow Chemical, has what they say will "save" the GM farming world: a newly formulated herbicide built on the deadly 2,4-D compound, which was a key ingredient in the chemical nightmare known as Agent Orange.

The Big Lie of Genetic Engineering and Industrial Farming

If you haven't made up your mind yet about whether genetic engineering is equivalent to crop suicide, then PLEASE watch this short video, which features a grandma in India who is trying to save the environment, and ultimately the world, with natural seeds and ecological farming. The star of this movement is Dr. Vandana Shiva, who founded the Navdanya Biodiversity Farm in India to help save traditional seeds before it's too late.

This is vitally important because large corporations like Monsanto are genetically modifying the world's seeds and patenting them as their own. These corporations say they're doing it to make farming more sustainable and better able to feed a growing, hungry world. But as Dr. Shiva in her elegant British accent articulately points out, that premise is proving to be nothing but a big fat lie. It's a lie that's been the source of countless suicides committed by Indian farmers who've gone broke from farming GM crops.

Virtually all of the claims of benefit of GM crops – increased yields, more food production, controlled pests and weeds, reductions in chemical use in agriculture, drought-tolerant seeds – have not materialized. Last year, The Global Citizens' Report on the State of GMOs,iv revealed:

* Contrary to the claim of feeding the world, genetic engineering has not increased the yield of a single crop.
* Herbicide tolerant (Roundup Ready) crops were supposed to control weeds and Bt crops were intended to control pests. Instead of controlling weeds and pests, GE crops have led to the emergence of super weeds and super pests … Herbicide-resistant crops such as Roundup Ready cotton can create the risk of herbicide resistant "superweeds" by transferring the herbicide resistance to weeds.
* Despite claims that GMOs will lower the levels of chemicals (pesticides and herbicides) used, this has not been the case. This is of great concern both because of the negative impacts of these chemicals on ecosystems and humans, and because there is the danger that increased chemical use will cause pests and weeds to develop resistance, requiring even more chemicals in order to manage them.
* Monsanto has been claiming that through genetic engineering it can breed crops for drought tolerance and other climate-resilient traits. This is a false promise.
* Among the false claims made by Monsanto and the Biotechnology industry is that GE foods are safe. However, there are enough independent studies to show that GE foods can cause considerable health damage.

Contrary to promises, GM crops are failing miserably all across the world. The reality simply isn't living up to the hype, and it's time to take action now – before it's too late.

FDA Eliminates 1 Million Signatures for GMO Labeling on 'Technical' Reasons

Mandatory labeling may be the only way to stop the proliferation of genetically engineered foods in the US, but simple petitions will likely fail. We strongly support state initiatives, such as California's ballot initiative to get mandatory labeling for genetically engineered foods sold in their state. A recent story highlights why state initiatives in particular are so vitally important.

In a brazen example of how the FDA completely ignores the people it's supposed to listen to and protect, the agency actually decided to eliminate and disregard over a million U.S. citizens' signatures and comments collected by the Just Label It campaignv. Organizers of the campaign said they gathered more than one million signatures of people who want to know what's in the foods they're eating. But the whole effort ended up being for naught as the FDA declared that signatures on form letters don't count.

According to the Chicago Tribunevi:

"The agency says that if 35,000 people, for instance, sign their name to the same form letter it only counts as one person or "comment." And if tens of thousands sign a petition, they are only counted as one "comment," too."

Therefore, under the FDA counting method, the one million signatures were whittled down to a measly 394 people asking for labeling... The FDA says it's still considering the issue, and that they would let the Just Label It group know if, and when, they make a decision on whether they would mandate labeling of genetically engineered foods.

Proof Positive that GMO Labeling WILL Change the Food Industry

Many don't fully appreciate the strategy of seeking to have genetically engineered foods labeled in California. The belief is that large food companies would refuse to have dual labeling; one for California and another for the rest of the country. It would be very expensive, not to mention a logistical nightmare. To avoid the dual labeling, many would likely opt to not use genetically engineered ingredients in their product, especially if the new label would be the equivalent of a skull and crossbones. This is why we are so committed to this initiative, as victory here will likely eliminate most genetically engineered foods from the US.

Powerful confirmation of this belief occurred in early 2012 when both Coca-Cola Company and PepsiCo Inc. chose to alter one of their soda ingredients as a result of California's labeling requirements for carcinogensvii:

"Coca-Cola Co. and PepsiCo Inc. are changing the way they make the caramel coloring used in their sodas as a result of a California law that mandates drinks containing a certain level of carcinogens bear a cancer warning label. The companies said the changes will be expanded nationally to streamline their manufacturing processes. They've already been made for drinks sold in California."

This is a PERFECT example of the national impact a California labeling mandate can, and no doubt WILL, have. While California is the only state requiring the label to state that the product contains the offending ingredient, these companies are switching their formula for the entire US market, rather than have two different labels.

According to USA Today:

"A representative for Coca-Cola, Diana Garza Ciarlante, said the company directed its caramel suppliers to modify their manufacturing processes to reduce the levels of the chemical 4-methylimidazole, which can be formed during the cooking process and as a result may be found in trace amounts in many foods. "While we believe that there is no public health risk that justifies any such change, we did ask our caramel suppliers to take this step so that our products would not be subject to the requirement of a scientifically unfounded warning," Garza-Giarlante said in an email."

Learn More about Genetically Engineered Foods

Due to lack of labeling, many Americans are still unfamiliar with what genetically engineered foods are. We have a plan to change that, and I urge you to participate and to continue learning more about genetically engineered foods and helping your friends and family do the same.

To start, please print out and use the Non-GMO Shopping Guide, created by the Institute for Responsible Technology. Share it with your friends and family, and post it to your social networks. You can also download a free iPhone application, available in the iTunes store. You can find it by searching for ShopNoGMO in the applications.

Your BEST strategy, however, is to simply buy USDA 100% Organic products whenever possible, (as these do not permit genetically engineered ingredients) or buy whole fresh produce and meat from local farmers.

The majority of the GMOs you're exposed to are via processed foods, so by cooking from scratch with whole foods, you can be sure you're not inadvertently consuming something laced with altered ingredients. When you do purchase processed food, avoid products containing anything related to corn or soy that are not 100 percent organic, as any foods containing these two non-organic ingredients are virtually guaranteed to contain genetically engineered ingredients, as well as toxic herbicide residues.

To learn more about genetically engineered foods, I highly recommend the following films and lectures:

* Hidden Dangers in Kid's Meals
* Your Milk on Drugs - Just Say No!
* Everything You Have to Know About Dangerous Genetically Modified Foods

Important Action Item: Support California's Ballot Initiative to Label GMO's!

In 2007, then-Presidential candidate Obama promised to "immediately" require GM labeling if elected. We're still waiting...

Fortunately, 24 U.S. states have (as part of their state governance) something called the Initiative Process, where residents can bring to ballot any law they want enacted, as long as it has sufficient support. California has organized just such a ballot initiative to get mandatory labeling for genetically engineered foods sold in their state. Michigan and Washington are also starting similar campaignsviii. Since California is the 8th largest economy in the world, a win for the California Initiative would be a huge step forward, and would likely affect ingredients and labeling nation-wide.

A coalition of consumer, public health and environmental organizations, food companies, and individuals has already submitted the California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Actix to the State Attorney General. Thousands of volunteers have already been enlisted, but more are needed. It's going to be an enormous battle, as the biotech industry will outspend us by 100 to 1, if not more, for their propaganda.

Needless to say, the campaign needs funds. So if you have the ability, I strongly encourage you to make a donation. But they also need more volunteers, because that's how we're going to win this battle. The biotech industry may outdo us in funding ability, but we as consumers still outnumber them. Pamm Larry, the California grandmother who created the initiative, is correct when she says we need to reach every single California community—large and small.

I urge you to get involved and help in any way you can. Be assured that what happens in California will affect the remainder of the U.S. states, so please support this important state initiative, even if you do not live there!

* No matter where you live, please help spread the word in your personal networks, on Facebook, and Twitter. For help with the messaging, please see LabelGMOs.org's "Spread the Word!" page
* Whether you live in California or not, please donate money to this historic effort, either through the LabelGMOs.org, or the Organic Consumers Fund
* Talk to organic producers and stores and ask them to actively support the California Ballot. It may be the only chance we have to label genetically engineered foods.
* Distribute WIDELY the Non-GMO Shopping Guide to help you identify and avoid foods with GMOs. Look for products (including organic products) that feature the Non-GMO Project Verified Seal to be sure that at-risk ingredients have been tested for GMO content. You can also download the free iPhone application that is available in the iTunes store. You can find it by searching for ShopNoGMO in the applications.
* For timely updates, please join the Organic Consumers Association on Facebook, or follow them on Twitter.
* Look for in-depth coverage of the issue at the Institute for Responsible Technology, subscribe to Spilling the Beans, and check out their Facebook or Twitter.

[DrJonescaptain of 1,000]

Discussion of bad germs on common surfaces,,,

By Dr. Mercola

What do restaurant menus, hands-free faucets, ATM machines and your physician's scrubs have in common? They are all among the "germiest" objects on Earth.

Yes, really.

As much as you might like to give the gold medal to toilet seats when it comes to squeamishly germ-ridden locations, science suggests there are much "germier" places that you're probably frequenting daily.

For example, one study found that each key on an ATM keypad harbors 1,200 germs, including E. coli and cold and flu viruses. The worst button is the "Enter" button, because everyone has to touch it. Flu viruses can survive on hard surfaces such as restaurant menus for as long as 18 hours, according to an article in Mental Flossi. Some of the other dirtiest places and objects might surprise you:

* Hospitals
* Lemon Slices in Restaurant Drinks
* Hotel Room Glasses
* Kitchen Cloths and Sponges
* Faucets and Sink Drains
* Toothbrushes
* Food Court Tables
* Fitting Rooms



* Restaurant Condiment
* Toy Stores
* Hotel Bedspreads and Pillows
* Light Switches
* Drinking Fountains
* Wet laundry—after it's been washed
* Escalator Handrails
* Gym Equipment



* Handbag Bottoms
* Gadget Shops
* Remote Controls and Computer Keyboards
* Door Knobs and Handles
* Cutting Boards
* Playground Equipment (Swings, Slides and Monkey Bars)
* Shopping Cart Handles
* Makeup Samples

Hospitals are Some of the Germiest Places on Earth

When you see hospital staff in bright, cheerfully colored scrubs and crisp white lab coats, do you think bacteria? That's exactly what you should think, considering the findings of several recent studies that show hospitals are not the safe, clean environments we'd like them to be.

1. A study published in 2011 in the American Journal of Infection Controlii found that more than 60 percent of healthcare workers' uniforms tested positive for potentially dangerous bacteria, including germs that cause pneumonia, bloodstream infections and drug-resistant infections such as MRSA. The samples were obtained from the sleeves, waists, and pockets of 75 registered nurses and 60 physicians at a busy university-based hospital. Eleven percent of the bugs were resistant to multiple front-line antibiotics. This study suggests healthcare workers' attire may be one surprising route by which pathogenic bacteria are transmitted from staff to patients.
2. Another 2011 studyiii found pathogenic bacteria—including MRSA—on the privacy curtains that separate care spaces in hospitals and clinics.
3. A 2009 studyiv showed that pathogenic microorganisms can even survive on the paper commonly used in clinical settings—so the penicillin script your physician hands you may come with its own colony of dangerous bacteria
4. A 2009 studyv of U.K. nursing homes found 24 percent of residents and seven percent of staff were colonized with MRSA, which means they were carrying the bacteria on their skin (and lab coats) but not showing signs of infection.

Rates of MRSA in health care settings have been climbing steadily. Statistically, six out of seven people infected with MRSA contract it at a healthcare facility, where the infection shows up in surgical wounds or around feeding tubes, catheters or other invasive devicesvi. However, these "super bugs" are no longer originating only in healthcare facilities. The bacteria are constantly adapting, and now they are being found in livestock that ends up on your dinner plate.

The "Farming" of Super Bugs

Today, as much as 70 percent of all antibiotic use in the United States takes place at concentrated animal feedlot operations (CAFOs), and these factory-scale farms are now brewing a novel strain of MRSA. CAFO animals are often fed antibiotics at low doses to prevent disease and promote growth.

MRSA, short for "Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus," is a very dangerous strain of staph bacteria that has developed resistance to the broad-spectrum antibiotics commonly used to treat it (methicillin, penicillin, oxacillin, amoxicillin, etc.). Initially, these "super bugs" were coming exclusively from hospital environments, but they've now adapted and spread to other public settings, such as schools, gyms, and locker rooms. And now a new strain has appeared in livestock animals as a direct result of antibiotic overuse.

Experts are concerned this new MRSA strain in livestock could begin to infect humans all over the globe.

Realizing that antibiotics abuse threatens public health, the U.S. FDA plans to issue new regulations for the use of antibiotics in the livestock industry by requiring a veterinarian's prescription before antibiotics can be given.vii

Other countries have also realized the inherent hazards of antibiotic overuse and have opted for a healthier approach to the raising of livestock. For example, Denmark stopped the widespread use of antibiotics in their pork industry 12 years ago. After they implemented the antibiotic ban, a Danish study later confirmed that Denmark had drastically reduced antibiotic-resistant bacteria in their animals and food. This is one reason why I feel it's so important to support smaller, local farms that raise livestock and poultry without antibiotics, on pastures where the animals graze on natural grasses, as opposed to confined to buildings and fed grains.

Bad Bugs, Bad Bugs… Whatchya Gonna Do?

As hard as you might try, you simply can't outrun or outsmart the microbes. They're literally everywhere, including all over you as you read this right now. We are their reproductive vectors--they ride around on us and hop from person to person, using us like an interpersonal railway system. Knowing this, how do you live your life without fearing an attack from every mustard bottle or stationary bike handle you come across?

Relax. You don't have to worry, as long as your immune system is in good shape.

We have shared our lives with the microbial world for many thousands of years, and we will probably do so for millions more. If your defenses are strong, your body will be pretty successful in fighting off invaders. It's only when your immune system is compromised that you're more likely to become ill.

And many of these microorganisms are beneficial—even the pathological ones. Some microbial exposure actually makes you stronger by "training" your immune system to react appropriately, especially when the exposure occurs in childhood. This concept is known as the "hygiene hypothesis."

There is evidence that our modern germophobic culture, with hand sanitizers on every shelf, is counterproductive to good health. Science has found that overly sterile environments are linked with higher rates of depression, increased inflammation, heart disease, asthma, allergies, and eczema. That said, some of today's pathogens are quite a bit more dangerous than those present a century ago, so taking some reasonable precautions is advisable. One of the simplest and most effective preventative measures is proper hand washing.

Your Number ONE Defense Against Germs: Proper Hand Washing

Getting back to basics is often the best advice, and that definitely applies here. Good old-fashioned hand washing with plain soap and water is one of the oldest and most powerful antibacterial treatments there is; no harsh disinfectants or antimicrobial soaps required. To make sure you're actually removing the germs when you wash your hands, follow these guidelines:
1. Use warm water
2. Use a mild non-antibacterial soap
3. Work up a good lather, all the way up to your wrists, for at least 10 or 15 seconds
4. Make sure you cover all surfaces, including the backs of your hands, wrists, between your fingers, and around and below your fingernails
5. Rinse thoroughly under running water
6. In public places, use a paper towel to open the door as a protection from germs that the handles may harbor

Also remember that your skin is your primary defense against bacteria—not the soap. So resist the urge to become obsessive about washing your hands. Washing too vigorously or too frequently can extract many of the protective oils in your skin, causing it to crack and potentially even bleed, providing germs a point of entry into your body where they can do harm. So mild to moderate washing is really all you need.

AVOID Anti-Bacterial Soaps

You should especially avoid the use of antibacterial soaps and wipes, especially those containing triclosan and triclocarban, chemicals that can worsen the problem of bacterial resistance. There is also recent evidence that triclosan may disrupt your hormone balance. If you wish to use a hand sanitizer, make sure it's made with safe plant-based ingredients such as rice bran extract, aloe vera, chamomile and tea tree oil, rather than the chemical agents you typically find. Now that you've taken care of your outer defenses, you should pay some attention to your inner defenses—your immune system.

My Basic Recipe for Building a Strong Immune System

Maintaining a strong immune system requires following the basic tenets of good health. There is no magic bullet. Staying healthy, or regaining your health, requires some diligence in making good choices about nutrition, exercise, sleep and the rest, over the long term. Good health habits will minimize your risk of getting sick from ANY cause.
Manage your stress; science has proven that stress and unresolved emotional issues have lingering adverse effects on your health
Optimize your vitamin D level with exposure to sunlight or a safe tanning bed; if this isn't possible, take an oral vitamin D supplement
Drink plenty of clean water
Eat foods that are best for your body, according to my Nutrition Plan
Optimize your insulin and leptin levels
Avoid excess sugar (especially fructose) and grain consumption
Avoid processed foods, chemical additives, artificial sweeteners, MSG, and all genetically modified ingredients
Consider taking a high-quality probiotic supplement, as your gastrointestinal system is an important part of your immune system
Exercise three to five times a week
Get plenty of restorative sleep every night



References:

* i Mental Floss January 11, 2012
* ii Am J Infection Control September 2011
* iii Am J Infection Control April 2011
* iv AJN December 2011
* v Journal of the American Geriatrics Society April 2009
* vi Seattle Times
* vii MNN April 12, 2012

[BlueMoon5captain of 1,000]

I subscribe to info from Dr. Mercola. Every few days, he provides very useful views regarding alternative-health-success (IMHO). He is a medical doctor, but recommends what I'd call "holistic health" rather than pharmaceuticals.
Let's start with his report on the biggest killer in the USA -- not heart disease or cancer, but rather... injury and death from doctor-prescribed drugs!

By Dr. Mercola

The latest data on the leading causes of deathi in the United States has been released by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

The report, which is based on 2010 data, lists the 10 leading causes of death as follows:

1. Diseases of the heart
2. Cancer
3. Chronic lower respiratory diseases
4. Cerebrovascular diseases (stroke)
5. Accidents (unintentional injuries)
6. Alzheimer's disease
7. Diabetes mellitus
8. Nephritis, nephritic syndrome and nephrosis (kidney disease)
9. Influenza and pneumonia
10. Intentional self-harm (suicide)

However, there is one leading cause of death that was left off of this list, and when that is factored in the costs to the economy, and the death toll itself, is actually even higher.

The CDC Left Conventional Medical Care Off of Their Death List -- It Should be #1

This claim is based on faulty reasoning. People with nine of the ten illnesses on the list typically seek--and receive--conventional medical care. Dr. Mercola claims it was the care that caused their deaths--and not the diseases themselves. That's akin to saying that a Ford SUV killed four people in a passenger car when, in fact, the driver of the SUV was drunk and rear-ended the car.

Let's assume that all of the people on the list received alternative medical care. I suspect that the diseases with which they were afflicted would still have killed them at about the same rate. Would you then say that holistic medical care is the number one cause of death? Where are the data showing that patients with the conditions on Dr. Mercola's list who received holistic care had a lower mortality rate or lived longer than those who received conventional medical care?

[DrJonescaptain of 1,000]

BM5 rises in defense of the establishment again, this time establishment medical care as opposed to alternative medical care. Will you also rise in defense of Paxil, Prozac, Zoloft and the SSRI's?

Let's assume that all of the people on the list received alternative medical care. I suspect that the diseases with which they were afflicted would still have killed them at about the same rate.

What references do you have for this statement? We should note that Dr Mercola provides references. He backs up what he says. How about you? care to back up your statement?

Ref:

I subscribe to info from Dr. Mercola. Every few days, he provides very useful views regarding alternative-health-success (IMHO). He is a medical doctor, but recommends what I'd call "holistic health" rather than pharmaceuticals.
Let's start with his report on the biggest killer in the USA -- not heart disease or cancer, but rather... injury and death from doctor-prescribed drugs!

By Dr. Mercola

The latest data on the leading causes of deathi in the United States has been released by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

The report, which is based on 2010 data, lists the 10 leading causes of death as follows:

1. Diseases of the heart
2. Cancer
3. Chronic lower respiratory diseases
4. Cerebrovascular diseases (stroke)
5. Accidents (unintentional injuries)
6. Alzheimer's disease
7. Diabetes mellitus
8. Nephritis, nephritic syndrome and nephrosis (kidney disease)
9. Influenza and pneumonia
10. Intentional self-harm (suicide)

However, there is one leading cause of death that was left off of this list, and when that is factored in the costs to the economy, and the death toll itself, is actually even higher.

The CDC Left Conventional Medical Care Off of Their Death List -- It Should be #1

This claim is based on faulty reasoning. People with nine of the ten illnesses on the list typically seek--and receive--conventional medical care. Dr. Mercola claims it was the care that caused their deaths--and not the diseases themselves. That's akin to saying that a Ford SUV killed four people in a passenger car when, in fact, the driver of the SUV was drunk and rear-ended the car.

Let's assume that all of the people on the list received alternative medical care. I suspect that the diseases with which they were afflicted would still have killed them at about the same rate. Would you then say that holistic medical care is the number one cause of death? Where are the data showing that patients with the conditions on Dr. Mercola's list who received holistic care had a lower mortality rate or lived longer than those who received conventional medical care?

[BlueMoon5captain of 1,000]

BM5 rises in defense of the establishment again, this time establishment medical care as opposed to alternative medical care. Will you also rise in defense of Paxil, Prozac, Zoloft and the SSRI's?

I'll answer your diversionary maneuver/attack after I explain to you--this time in more detail--how Dr. Mercola engages in faulty reasoning when he claims that conventional medical care is the number one cause of death. He makes that error (one you embrace) by misunderstanding the process of classification. The afflictions on his list of ten should really be a list of eight under the classification of Diseases, making the number one cause of death Heart Diseases. (Yes, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention included "accidents" and "suicide," but they were not number one in any event, which makes their inclusion moot.)

Dr. Mercola and you superimpose an entirely different classification--another paradigm completely--when you designate errors in conventional medical methodology as a "disease." By choosing to use that classification, you are obligated (assuming you want to prove your case and provide a basis for comparison) to list subclassifications, i.e.: a) physician errors, including wrong dosage, incorrect diagnosis, incorrect medication, etc.; b) hospital staff errors, including misreading a prescription by a pharmacist, failure of a nurse to record times medications were given and in what amounts, etc.; c) procedural errors by hospital administration or the hospital's medical director. The list goes on. If you seek to dramatize the serious shortcomings of conventional medicine, you should place them in a stand-alone classification, thereby--I repeat-- making it possible to ascertain if, in fact, they trump all other events in causing deaths in the practice of conventional medicine. Your failure to do that makes your claim ring hollow.

Let's assume[/b] that all of the people on the list received alternative medical care. I suspect that the diseases with which they were afflicted would still have killed them at about the same rate.

What references do you have for this statement? We should note that Dr Mercola provides references. He backs up what he says. How about you? care to back up your statement?

My "references" are anecdotal, which you will readily dismiss (I used the verb "suspect"). Nevertheless, in my own stake, in the past decade, eight individuals who eschewed conventional treatment for cancer and went the holistic route, died within a matter of weeks--three of them in the same family (some people are slow learners). I had occasion to give a blessing to a man who delayed cancer treatment and thought he could be cured by drinking a variety of herbal concoctions. By the time of the blessing, I knew he had only weeks to live; and with his family looking on, the spirit constrained me to tell him that in as loving and supportive a way as possible. Had he received conventional treatment at Stage I or Stage II, his life would have been prolonged; he may even have been cured.

As for your denigration of psychiatric drugs, perhaps you would prefer to return to the days when people who were mentally ill were "put away" for the rest of their lives because they could not be treated on an outpatient basis. My aunt entered Utah State Hospital (at the east end of Provo's Center Street) at age 34, diagnosed with schizophrenia She spent her entire life there, in a padded cell, dying in her 50s. Psychiatric drugs have been a blessing to many of the mentally ill, untoward side effects notwithstanding. It's our family's tragedy that they weren't available for my aunt.

[DrJonescaptain of 1,000]

If you read the post, you will see that it is Dr Mercola (himself a medical doctor) who makes and substantiates the assertion regarding the dangers of conventional medical drugs and treatments, not me. I like his research and often (but not always) agree with him -- and I do not claim to have the experience that he (as a medical practioner) has. Yet you seem to delight in attacking me personally -- right? Is that right?

And Dr Mercola provides references; by contrast:

BM5: My "references" are anecdotal, which you will readily dismiss (I used the verb "suspect")....
Had he received conventional treatment at Stage I or Stage II, his life would have been prolonged; he may even have been cured.

How do you KNOW that "Had he received conventional treatment at Stage I or Stage II, his life would have been prolonged;"
How do you know that?

[BlueMoon5captain of 1,000]

If you read the post, you will see that it is Dr Mercola (himself a medical doctor) who makes and substantiates the assertion regarding the dangers of conventional medical drugs and treatments, not me.

Oh? What did you mean then when you wrote in your Febl. 28 post: I subscribe to info [emphases added] from Dr. Mercola. . . . Let's start with his report on the biggest killer in the USA. . .not heart disease or cancer but rather. . .injury and death from doctor-prescribed drugs!" Clearly, you endorsed his report.

: I like his research and often (but not always) agree with him -- and I do not claim to have the experience that he (as a medical practioner) has. Yet you seem to delight in attacking me personally -- right? Is that right?

You initiated the personal attack when you wrote, mockingly, "BM5 rises in defense of the establishment again. . . ." (May 28, 7:44 p.m.). My response to your endorsement of Dr. Mercola's claim was to take issue with its validity; it wasn't a personal attack on you.

: And Dr Mercola provides references; by contrast. . . .

BM5: My "references" are anecdotal, which you will readily dismiss (I used the verb "suspect")....
Had he received conventional treatment at Stage I or Stage II, his life would have been prolonged; he may even have been cured.

: How do you KNOW that "Had he received conventional treatment at Stage I or Stage II, his life would have been prolonged;"
How do you know that?

His oncologist told him so.

There are numerous journal articles that expose the problems with alternative medicine. Here is an excerpt from one:

The real danger of alternative medicine is that it exploits the credibility of those others less fortunately endowed. Practitioners of alternative medicine, unfettered by regulatory standards or any established code of ethics, take advantage of minors and the credulous. Ethnic minorities, immigrants, and younger people are among those who may not understand methods of access to orthodox medicine and are particularly vulnerable. [. . .some practitioners] neglect important symptoms, denying patients effective therapy. . . . A disturbing study by J. Leibrich, in Search of Well Being--Exploratory Research into Complementary Therapies. . .shows a major lack of critical scientific evaluation.
(New Zealand Medical Journal, 102:416-7, 1989, D. W. Beaven, Professor of Medicine, Christchurch School of Medicine)

[jonesdecaptain of 1,000]

You initiated the personal attack when you wrote, mockingly, "BM5 rises in defense of the establishment again. . . ." (May 28, 7:44 p.m.).

How is what you quoted a personal attack? DrJones was describing a behavior, and even more particularly a specific act, not describing a characteristic of your person... so how could it be a personal attack?

There are numerous journal articles that expose the problems with alternative medicine. Here is an excerpt from one:

The real danger of alternative medicine is that it exploits the credibility of those others less fortunately endowed. Practitioners of alternative medicine, unfettered by regulatory standards or any established code of ethics, take advantage of minors and the credulous. Ethnic minorities, immigrants, and younger people are among those who may not understand methods of access to orthodox medicine and are particularly vulnerable. [. . .some practitioners] neglect important symptoms, denying patients effective therapy. . . . A disturbing study by J. Leibrich, in Search of Well Being--Exploratory Research into Complementary Therapies. . .shows a major lack of critical scientific evaluation.
(New Zealand Medical Journal, 102:416-7, 1989, D. W. Beaven, Professor of Medicine, Christchurch School of Medicine)

This, on the other hand IS an ad-hominem argument. It basically says that alternatives to mainstream medicine are only trusted by "minors and the credulous", and more specifically "Ethnic minorities, immigrants, and younger people". In addition to being racist and classist, this quote ignores the facts of the matter and does EXACTLY what you are accusing DrJones of doing, ie distracting and distorting the matter and arguing with false logic.

That said, thank you for quoting it... I think it clarifies your position and how you approach this topic quite well for everyone who had been following this thread.

[BlueMoon5captain of 1,000]

You initiated the personal attack when you wrote, mockingly, "BM5 rises in defense of the establishment again. . . ." (May 28, 7:44 p.m.).

: How is what you quoted a personal attack? DrJones was describing a behavior, and even more particularly a specific act, not describing a characteristic of your person... so how could it be a personal attack?

But he was describing "a characteristic of [my] person" by saying that I rise again in defense of the establishment.

There are numerous journal articles that expose the problems with alternative medicine. Here is an excerpt from one:

The real danger of alternative medicine is that it exploits the credibility of those others less fortunately endowed. Practitioners of alternative medicine, unfettered by regulatory standards or any established code of ethics, take advantage of minors and the credulous. Ethnic minorities, immigrants, and younger people are among those who may not understand methods of access to orthodox medicine and are particularly vulnerable. [. . .some practitioners] neglect important symptoms, denying patients effective therapy. . . . A disturbing study by J. Leibrich, in Search of Well Being--Exploratory Research into Complementary Therapies. . .shows a major lack of critical scientific evaluation.
(New Zealand Medical Journal, 102:416-7, 1989, D. W. Beaven, Professor of Medicine, Christchurch School of Medicine)

: This, on the other hand IS an ad-hominem argument. It basically says that alternatives to mainstream medicine are only trusted by "minors and the credulous", and more specifically "Ethnic minorities, immigrants, and younger people". In addition to being racist and classist, this quote ignores the facts of the matter and does EXACTLY what you are accusing DrJones of doing, ie distracting and distorting the matter and arguing with false logic.

Dr. Beaven does not say that "alternatives to mainstream medicine" are only trusted by "minors and the credulous" (you inserted the adverb to leverage your criticism). He says they are "particularly vulnerable"--not exclusively vulnerable. Furthermore, he says they are among "those who may not understand methods. . . ." Contrary to your groundless assertion, Dr. Beaven is not guilty of using false logic; he isn't arguing. He is simply stating the facts, discomforting though they may be.

[DrJonescaptain of 1,000]

So, I agree with the analysis of jonesde, but I'm willing to look at an important fundamental question here and discontinue my responses to personal attacks or other diversions at this time -- Here is the question I wish to research:

QUESTION: Is it true that the practice of conventional medicine including doctor error and pharmaceutical side-effects is among the leading causes of death in the United States?

As stated in a Dr Mercola article:

Conventional medical care was not listed as a top cause of death, even though research points to adverse drug reactions, medical errors, hospital-acquired infections, unnecessary procedures and other consequences of modern medicine as a leading cause of death.

I find this to be an important question, worth some study. And I invite forum members to join in the study.
It has to do also with taking our OWN responsibility for our health, and not putting our trust in the arm of pharmaceuticals/doctor prescriptions or even hospitals.

I find two articles by Dr Mercola that say yes to this question -- with references. It is the references that provide hard DATA responding to the question that interest me particularly, and any contrary references with DATA we can find.

1st article:

By Dr. Mercola

The latest data on the leading causes of deathi in the United States has been released by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

The report, which is based on 2010 data, lists the 10 leading causes of death as follows:

1. Diseases of the heart
2. Cancer
3. Chronic lower respiratory diseases
4. Cerebrovascular diseases (stroke)
5. Accidents (unintentional injuries)
6. Alzheimer's disease
7. Diabetes mellitus
8. Nephritis, nephritic syndrome and nephrosis (kidney disease)
9. Influenza and pneumonia
10. Intentional self-harm (suicide)

In an analysis, 24/7 Wall St. determined that the costs to the economy for these top 10 causes, including not only direct medical care but also the indirect loss of productivity, amounts to a whopping $1.1 trillion!

However, there is one leading cause of death that was left off of this list, and when that is factored in the costs to the economy, and the death toll itself, is actually even higher.

The CDC Left Conventional Medical Care Off of Their Death List -- It Should be #1

Over a decade ago, Professor Bruce Pomerance of the University of Toronto concluded that properly prescribed and correctly taken pharmaceutical drugs were the fourth leading cause of death in the U.S. More recently, an article authored in two parts by Gary Null, PhD, Carolyn Dean, MD, ND, Martin Feldman, MD, Debora Rasio, MD, and Dorothy Smith, PhD, describes in excruciating detail how the modern conventional American medical system has bumbled its way into becoming the leading cause of death and injury in the United States.

From medical errors to adverse drug reactions to unnecessary procedures, heart disease, cancer deaths and infant mortality, the authors took statistics straight from the most respected medical and scientific journals and investigative reports by the Institutes of Medicine (IOM), and showed that on the whole, American medicine caused more harm than good.

In 2010 (the same year from which the CDC data came), years after the original article was written, an analysis in the New England Journal of Medicineii piqued my interest – as the researchers found that, despite efforts to improve patient safety in the past few years, the health care system hasn't changed much at all.

Instead, 18 percent of patients were harmed by medical care (some repeatedly) and over 63 percent of the injuries could have been prevented. In nearly 2.5 percent of these cases, the problems caused or contributed to a person's death. In another 3 percent, patients suffered from permanent injury, while over 8 percent experienced life-threatening issues, such as severe bleeding during surgery.

In all there were over 25 injuries per 100 admissions! In my update to the original Death by Medicine article, you can get an idea of just how deadly the conventional medical care system actually is:

* In a June 2010 report in the Journal of General Internal Medicine, study authors said that in looking over recordsiii that spanned from 1976 to 2006 (the most recent year available) they found that, of 62 million death certificates, almost a quarter-million deaths were coded as having occurred in a hospital setting due to medication errors.
* An estimated 450,000 preventable medication-related adverse events occur in the U.S. every year.
* The costs of adverse drug reactionsiv to society are more than $136 billion annually -- greater than the total cost of cardiovascular or diabetic care.
* Adverse drug reactions cause injuries or death in 1 of 5 hospital patients.
* The reason there are so many adverse drug eventsv in the U.S. is because so many drugs are used and prescribed – and many patients receive multiple prescriptions at varying strengths, some of which may counteract each other or cause more severe reactions when combined.

How Many Deaths by Medicine are Disguised as Other Causes?

Another issue is just how many "accidents" or "suicides" are actually the result of accidental drug overdoses. Prescription drugs are now killing far more people than illegal drugs, and while most major causes of preventable deaths are declining, those from prescription drug use are increasing -- and this is according to the CDC's own datavi.

In 2009, there were nearly 4.6 million drug-related visitsvii to U.S. emergency rooms nationwide, with more than half due to adverse reactions to prescription medications – most of which were being taken exactly as prescribedviii.

Further, between 2001 and 2008, there was a 36 percent increase in hospital admissionsix, and a 28 percent increase in emergency room visits, among children 5 and younger who had accidentally ingested medication. ER visits for ingestion of prescription opioid painkillers, such as Oxycodone, increased 101 percent! So it is unclear how many deaths from accidental drug overdose are classified as accidents or suicides.

The 9th and 11th Top Killers Might Also be Linked to Medical Care

The 11th leading cause of death according to the CDC is septicemia (sometimes called blood poisoning), which is bacteria in your bloodstream that is often caused by an infection in your body -- an infection that is often acquired in the hospital! A study published in the Archives of Internal Medicinex showed that sepsis and pneumonia caused by hospital-acquired infections killed 48,000 patients and ramped up health care costs by over $8 billion in 2006. The study also found that 20 percent of people who developed sepsis died; 11 percent of those who developed pneumonia died.

Pneumonia is the 9th leading cause of death, and in some cases may again be related to the high risk of acquiring an infection should you enter the hospital.

A different study in 2006 showed that "central-line-associated" bloodstream infectionsxi caused by catheters placed directly into veins resulted in a $26,839 loss for each patient that came down with this type of hospital-acquired infection. This same study estimated that 2 million people come down with hospital-acquired infections of any type in every year, and that approximately 100,000 die from those infections. Despite their high death toll, hospital-acquired infections make no appearance in the CDC's report.

Most of the Leading Causes of Death are Preventable

Most chronic diseases, including cancer, heart disease, diabetes, and obesity, are largely preventable with simple lifestyle changes. Even infectious diseases like the flu can often be warded off by a healthy way of life.

Imagine the lowered death toll, not to mention costs to the economy, if more people decided to take control of their health … heart disease and cancer alone accounted for 47 percent of deaths in the United States in 2010, and there are many strategies you can implement to lower your risk of these diseases … and most of the leading causes of death in the United States.

The added bonus to this is that the healthier you are, the less you will need to rely on conventional medical care, which is a leading cause of death. So what does a "healthy lifestyle" entail?

* Proper Food Choices

For a comprehensive guide on which foods to eat and which to avoid, see my nutrition plan. Generally speaking, you should be looking to focus your diet on whole, unprocessed foods (vegetables, meats, raw dairy, nuts, and so forth) that come from healthy, sustainable, local sources, such as a small organic farm not far from your home.

For the best nutrition and health benefits, you will want to eat a good portion of your food raw. Personally, I aim to eat about 80-85 percent of my food raw, including raw eggs and humanely raised organic animal products that have not been raised on a CAFO (confined animal feeding operation).

Nearly as important as knowing which foods to eat more of is knowing which foods to avoid, and topping the list is fructose. Sugar, and fructose in particular, acts as a toxin in and of itself, and as such drive multiple disease processes in your body, not the least of which is insulin resistance, a major cause of accelerated aging.

* Comprehensive Exercise Program, including High-Intensity Exercise like Peak Fitness

Even if you're eating the healthiest diet in the world, you still need to exercise to reach the highest levels of health, and you need to be exercising effectively, which means including not only core-strengthening exercises, strength training, and stretching but also high-intensity activities into your rotation. High-intensity interval-type training boosts human growth hormone (HGH) production, which is essential for optimal health, strength and vigor. I've discussed the importance of Peak Fitness for your health on numerous occasions, so for more information, please review this previous article.

* Stress Reduction and Positive Thinking

You cannot be optimally healthy if you avoid addressing the emotional component of your health and longevity, as your emotional state plays a role in nearly every physical disease -- from heart disease and depression, to arthritis and cancer. Effective coping mechanisms are a major longevity-promoting factor in part because stress has a direct impact on inflammation, which in turn underlies many of the chronic diseases that kill people prematurely every day. Meditation, prayer, social support and exercise are all viable options that can help you maintain emotional and mental equilibrium.

* Proper Sun Exposure to Optimize Vitamin D

We have long known that it is best to get your vitamin D from sun exposure, and if at all possible, I strongly urge you to make sure you're getting out in the sun on a daily basis. Vitamin D plays an important role in preventing numerous illnesses ranging from cancer to the flu.

The important factor when it comes to vitamin D is your serum level, which should ideally be between 50-70 ng/ml year-round. Sun exposure or a safe tanning bed is the preferred method for optimizing vitamin D levels, but a vitamin D3 supplement can be used as a last resort. Most adults need about 8,000 IU's of vitamin D a day to achieve serum levels above 40 ng/ml, which is still just below the minimum recommended serum level of 50 ng/ml.

* High Quality Animal-Based Omega-3 Fats

Animal-based omega-3 fat like krill oil is a strong factor in helping people live longer, and many experts believe that it is likely the predominant reason why the Japanese are the longest lived race on the planet.

* Avoid as Many Chemicals, Toxins, and Pollutants as Possible

This includes tossing out your toxic household cleaners, soaps, personal hygiene products, air fresheners, bug sprays, lawn pesticides, and insecticides, just to name a few, and replacing them with non-toxic alternatives.

References:

* $1.1 Trillion: What the 10 Leading Causes of Death Cost the U.S. Economy, 24/7 Wall St., January 18, 2012.
* i Deaths: Preliminary Data for 2010, National Vital Statistics Reports, January 11, 2012: 60(4); 1-69, Sherry L. Murphy, BS, et al. (PDF)
* ii Temporal Trends in Rates of Patient Harm Resulting from Medical Care, New England Journal of Medicine, November 25, 2010: 363(22); 2124-34, C. P. Landrigan, et al.
* iii Are Hospitals Really More Deadly in July, When Novice Doctors Arrive?, JetLib News.
* iv Preventable Adverse Drug Reactions: A Focus on Drug Interactions, Centers for Education and Research on Therapeutics. (PDF)
* v Preventable Adverse Drug Reactions: A Focus on Drug Interactions, Centers for Education and Research on Therapeutics. (PDF)
* vi Deaths: Preliminary Data for 2009, National Vital Statistics Reports, March 16, 2011: 59(4); 1-51, Kenneth D. Kochanek, MA, et al. (PDF)
* vii InfoFacts: Drug-Related Hospital Emergency Room Visits, National Institute on Drug Abuse.
* viii Highlights of the 2009 Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN) Findings on Drug-Related Emergency Department Visits, The DAWN Report, December 28, 2010.
* ix The Growing Impact of Pediatric Pharmaceutical Poisoning, Journal of Pediatrics, February 2012: 160(2); 265-270.e1, G. Randall Bond, MD, et al.
* x New Study Shows Sepsis and Pneumonia Caused by Hospital-Acquired Infections Kill 48,000 Patients, EurekAlert, February 22, 2010. (Press Release)
* xi Economics of Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infections, American Journal of Medical Quality, November/December 2006: 21(6); 7S-16S, Richard P. Shannon, MD, et al.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/artic ... onomy.aspx
___________________________

2nd article by Dr Mercola:

By Dr. Mercola

Prescription PillsIt's been seven years since I posted the comprehensive, footnoted research article, Death by Medicine, on this website.

Authored in two parts by Gary Null PhD, Carolyn Dean MD ND, Martin Feldman MD, Debora Rasio MD, and Dorothy Smith PhD, it described in excruciating detail how the modern American medical system had bumbled its way into becoming the leading cause of death and injury in the United States.

From medical errors to adverse drug reactions to unnecessary procedures, heart disease, cancer deaths and infant mortality, the authors took statistics straight from the most respected medical and scientific journals and investigative reports by the Institutes of Medicine (IOM), and showed that on the whole American medicine caused more harm than good.

The purpose of this was not to frighten you, but to help you make informed choices about your health, and to provide you with the tools you need to take control of your own health

Seven years after the original article was written, an analysis in the New England Journal of Medicine November 25, 2010 piqued my interest -- the researchers found that, despite efforts to improve patient safety in the past few years, the health care system hasn't changed much at all.

Instead, 18 percent of patients were harmed by medical care (some repeatedly) and over 63 percent of the injuries could have been prevented. In nearly 2.5 percent of these cases, the problems caused or contributed to a person's death. In another 3 percent, patients suffered from permanent injury, while over 8 percent experienced life-threatening issues, such as severe bleeding during surgery.

In all there were over 25 injuries per 100 admissions!

Shocked, I decided to do some research of my own on the state of American health care today.What I found is the grim picture that I'm sharing with you, as an update to the original Death by Medicine article.

Over 40,000 Mistakes EVERY Day!

Unfortunately, the NEJM article was just a reminder of something that the Thirteenth Annual HealthGrades Hospital Quality in America Study pointed out earlier this year.

HealthGrades has been studying the quality of care in the nation's hospitals since 1988. This year they analyzed approximately 40 million Medicare patients' records from 2007 through 2009, and found that 1 in 9 patients developed a hospital-acquired infection.

The HealthGrades report said that "the incidence rate of medical harm occurring is estimated to be over 40,000 each and EVERY day according to the Institute for Healthcare Improvement."

Another study, in 2008, by the Office of Inspector General for the Department of Health and Human Services, also reported grave evidence that something is amiss in the hospital setting in America: One in seven Medicare beneficiaries who is hospitalized will be harmed as a result of the medical care they receive in the hospital, the study said.

Authors of this study found that physician reviewers determined nearly half, or 44 percent of the adverse and temporary harm events "were clearly or likely preventable." The cost of these mistakes was estimated at $324 million in October alone. The mistakes equate to 3.5 percent of the Medicare budget.

Hospital-Acquired Infections

Another study, published in the Archives of Internal Medicine this year, showed that sepsis and pneumonia caused by hospital-acquired infections killed 48,000 patients and ramped up health care costs by $8.1 billion in 2006 alone. Both these infections are mostly preventable through better infection controls. The study also found that 20 percent of people who developed sepsis died; 11 percent of those who developed pneumonia died.

The authors noted that many hospital-acquired infections are super resistant to common antibiotics – and it's not just sepsis and pneumonia that they're talking about.

A different study in 2006 showed that "central-line-associated" bloodstream infections caused by catheters placed directly into veins resulted in a $26,839 loss for each patient that came down with this type of hospital-acquired infection. This same study estimated that 2 million people come down with hospital-acquired infections of any type in every year, and that approximately 100,000 die from those infections.

Medication Errors are a Major Killer

In 2000 the Institutes of Medicine reported that medical errors were the eighth leading cause of death in the U.S., killing between 44,000 and 98,000 people each year. While the number of errors today is said to possibly be the fourth leading cause of death in a hospital, health officials agree that this type of death-by-medicine is still prevalent -- and preventable.

In a June 2010 report in the Journal of General Internal Medicine, study authors said that in looking over records that spanned from 1976 to 2006 (the most recent year available) they found that, of 62 million death certificates, almost a quarter-million deaths were coded as having occurred in a hospital setting due to medication errors. They also found that these errors spiked in July, and particularly in teaching hospitals.

There are four points in the medication use process at which errors may occur:

1. when the medication is ordered (written, electronic, or oral)
2. when the medication order is transcribed and verified
3. when it's dispensed, and
4. when it's administered

The June 2010 report narrowed the errors down to:

* drug overdose
* prescribing the wrong drug
* taking the wrong drug, or
* accidents involving medications during surgery or medical procedures

Older adults are at a higher risk of medication errors and have a greater propensity for experiencing harmful and fatal errors. The most common types of medication errors in older adults are omission and improper dose.

Nearly Half a Million Preventable Adverse Drug Reactions

An estimated 450,000 preventable medication-related adverse events occur in the U.S. every year.

A study published in the Journal of Gerontology in 2006 showed that adverse drug reactions are very common in frail elderly persons after a hospital stay, and polypharmacy and warfarin use consistently increase the risk.

The costs of adverse drug reactions to society are more than $136 billion annually -- greater than the total cost of cardiovascular or diabetic care. Adverse drug reactions cause injuries or death in 1 of 5 hospital patients.

The reason there are so many adverse drug events in the U.S. is because so many drugs are used and prescribed – and many patients receive multiple prescriptions at varying strengths, some of which may counteract each other or cause more severe reactions when combined.

In 2009 there were nearly 3.68 billion prescriptions filled in the U.S. That averages to almost 12 prescriptions for every person in the U.S. Other interesting drug statistics are:

* Specialists give more than 2 prescriptions per visit
* Just over 89 percent of Medicare patients take prescription medicine daily
* 46 percent take 5 or more prescriptions chronically
* Nearly 54 percent take meds prescribed by more than one doctor

One thing that the drug companies don't tell you, and that your physician may not realize, is that premarketing drug safety profiles may be very narrow: most new drugs have 3,000 or less short-term patient exposures. Another fact the drug companies don't advertise is that some drugs have rare toxicity possibilities, meaning very bad side effects could occur in as few as 1 in 20,000 patients. To detect such rare toxicity, more than 60,000 patients must be exposed AFTER the drug is marketed.

49th in Life Expectancy, First in Health Care Costs

The latest study published in Health Affairs revealed that the United States now ranks 49th in the world for both male and female life expectancy, down from 24th in 1999.

In 1950, the United States was fifth among the leading industrialized nations with respect to female life expectancy at birth, surpassed only by Sweden, Norway, Australia, and the Netherlands. The last available measure of female life expectancy had the United States ranked at forty-sixth in the world. U.S. infants also are in the basement when it comes to mortality rates; according to 2009 data compiled by the World Bank, the U.S. is 41 places behind other countries in infant mortality.

Is American Medicine Working?

There's no doubt that government health care officials are worried about this country's reputation for safety in the hospital setting. If they weren't, they wouldn't have set up the Center for Quality Improvement and Patient Safety, a task force charged with developing plans and strategies for making American health care safer.

The problem is that, as it always with government, things move very slowly when change is needed, so the nation has yet to have a nation adverse event reporting system for hospital medical errors. We also don't have any federal standards regarding state systems. The question is whether living the status quo is going to make us any healthier or not, and if it doesn't, what are we going to do to make a better life for ourselves?

What about Preventive Care?

It doesn't take a genius to figure out that the American health care system is skewed toward treating illnesses and diseases, not preventing them. In 2003, my Death by Medicine report showed that judging by health care spending alone, the U.S. should be the healthiest country in the world with the best medicine available. But it wasn't.

And today, it still isn't.

One reason for that is because an obscure federal panel that most people never hear about not only defines what preventive medicine is, but decides what services your health care dollars will pay for. Historically that panel, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, has been accused of being ultra-conservative in the way of preventive care. But when it does approve it, the definition of preventive care means some kind of diagnostic test for a possible existing illness, not a strategy for staying well.

For example, if you take a look at the task force's website, you'll see lists of "preventive" medicine topics the group is considering that include such things as aspirin use and various types of disease screenings -- with only one mention of vitamin supplements as a possible upcoming preventive strategy.

If you click on the task force's A to Z topic guide of existing "preventive" health care, you'll see that almost every single one is some type of disease screening or counseling for a condition you already have.

And that's what's wrong with U.S. health care, whether it was seven years ago or today -- we are all too eager to embrace screenings for diseases or illnesses we may or may not have, and counseling and/or medical treatment in the form of pills and chemicals and surgeries for it, after we find out what disease it is we have.

According to the Kaiser Foundation and the CDC, the main drivers of health care costs in the U.S. are technology and prescription drugs; chronic disease; aging of the population; and administrative costs.

I agree that these are huge contributors to what is killing us as a nation financially and as a people. But I DON'T agree with the context in which they're presented. If you've followed all the information I've given you here, and even skimmed the 2003 Death by Medicine article, then I think you'll see why I think the major contributors have a slightly different paradigm -- and that the only way we are get healthier as a nation, and drive medical costs down too, is to change that paradigm.

That's because the foundational causes of what's driving health care costs in America are:

1. The emphasis on sickness and treatment, rather than health, fitness, and prevention which is primarily fostered by ultra-sophisticated marketing strategies employed by the drug industry.
2. Fraud -- by both consumers and providers, including the drug industry.
3. Unnecessary procedures, medications, hospitalizations and screenings
4. Medical mistakes, hospital-acquired infections, and surgical and device errors

If we were only to address these issues, beginning with changing the emphasis of our well-being to health and fitness, and then following the healthy lifestyle that paradigm suggests, I promise that the issue of sickness in America and what it's costing us -- as well as the death-by-medicine events will begin to fade away very quickly.

It's time to quit bombarding your body with medical interventions and to reward yourself with the fit and healthy body that come from living fit and lean.

And until then -- until our health care system as a whole -- changes the emphasis of what we're doing to health and healthful living, exercise, proper nutrition and diet, and vitamin supplementation, we're not going to see anything in our health care system change, even if we wait another seven years to see how it's going.

References:

* Hanlon JT, Pieper CF, Hajjar ER, Sloane RJ, Lindblad CI, Ruby CM,Schmader KE. Incidence and Predictors of All and Preventable Adverse Drug Reactions in Frail Elderly Persons after Hospital Stay. Journals of Gerontology A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2006 May;61(5):511-5
* Buerhaus PI, Needleman J. Policy implications of research on nurse staffing and quality of patient care. Policy Politics Nurs Practice 2000; 1(1):5-15.
* The Department of Health and Human Services and The Department of Justice -- Health Care Fraud and Abuse Control Program Annual Report for Fiscal Year 2009
* Adverse Events in Hospitals: National Incidence Among Medicare Beneficiaries

(links here:
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/artic ... pdate.aspx )

[BlueMoon5captain of 1,000]

So, I agree with the analysis of jonesde, but I'm willing to look at an important fundamental question here and discontinue my responses to personal attacks or other diversions at this time -- Here is the question I wish to research:

QUESTION: Is it true that the practice of conventional medicine including doctor error and pharmaceutical side-effects is among the leading causes of death in the United States?

As stated in a Dr Mercola article:

Conventional medical care was not listed as a top cause of death, even though research points to adverse drug reactions, medical errors, hospital-acquired infections, unnecessary procedures and other consequences of modern medicine as a leading cause of death.

The foregoing is strikingly different from what appears in your post of May 28, 7:44 p.m. (in red ink in large font): The CDC Left Conventional Medical Care Off of Their Death List--It Should be #1.

Case closed.