Red Wine and the Brain

DO I NEED TO DRINK MORE WINE TO PROTECT MY BRAIN?

It’s no surprise that wine (or specifically, the resveratrol content of red wine) has protective benefits in moderation, but you may not understand exactly how resveratrol works.

Calorie restriction without nutrient restriction has consistently shown to extend lifespan in mammals.  This calorie restriction works by improving the health and number of the mitochondria by activating a set of genes called the Sirtuin genes.

Research on resveratrol has found that it resveratrol activates this same Sirtuin pathway.  In this particular study, researchers looked at the additional ability of resveratrol to protect the brain from a neurotransmitter called glutamate, which can create a wave of brain damage with seizures and migraines.

Read study here

 

from Chiropractor Mesa & Tempe Arizona | Chiropractic care as it should be http://ift.tt/1DcNlAT
via IFTTT

Dangers of Diabetic Medications

ARE DIABETIC MEDICATIONS KILLING OFF OUR DIABETICS?

Seems kind of an odd question, huh?

I mean, after all, doesn’t the Hippocratic Oath state that first and foremost we should do no harm?  So why does it always seem that many medications actually increase the risk of the diseases we are trying to ameliorate?  It’s been known for some time that the sulphonylurea class of drugs (i.e. glipizide / Glucotrol) actually damages the beta cells of the pancreas, increasing the risk for insulin dependence.  There’s also been heated debate about pulling Avandia (another class of diabetic drugs called the thiazolidinediones) off the market because of the greatly increased risk of cardiovascular disease.  It currently has a block box warning.

This particular study found no increased risk with the combination of a sulphonylurea with metformin on heart disease when compared to other standard diabetic approaches.  So basically, it’s ok because they ALL increase the risk of heart disease.  Looking deeper into the study, though, researchers found that there was ONE exception.  You guessed it–the combination that included dietary changes!!

 

from Chiropractor Mesa & Tempe Arizona | Chiropractic care as it should be http://ift.tt/1U7ePvT
via IFTTT

Sudden Unexpected Death in Epilepsy – Closer to an Answer?

 

SUDEP answers

Among epilepsy sufferers, one of the greatest fears is SUDEP – sudden unexplained death in epilepsy.

Maybe this is because it seems like we don’t know why it happens. Maybe it’s because it seems to happen for no reason.

SUDEP is a very real concern for people with epilepsy. People with epilepsy are at an increased risk of dying when compared to the general population who do not have seizures. Some of this increase risk is from obvious causes like drowning and motor vehicle accidents as a direct result of things that happen during a seizure.

But other deaths are not quite as clear cut. For this reason researchers are constantly searching for answers. High on the list of potential suspects is cardiac rhythm abnormalities. This particular study attempts to clarify the links between sudden cardiac arrest and epilepsy. Specifically, ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation (VT/VF) were identified. V-fib is a condition where the heart is beating out of sync. As a result, blood cannot be efficiently pumped through the heart. This is a life-threatening condition.

Ventricular tachycardia is a condition where the ventricles of the heart are beating at too fast of a rate. While not as life-threatening as V-fib, it is a sign that something is seriously wrong with the ability to control the rate that the heart is beating.

With this in mind, the researchers looked at 3 groups of participants:

1. 18 people with active epilepsy as well as ECG-confirmed VT/VF.
2. 470 individuals with VT/VF without epilepsy
3. 54 individuals with epilepsy but without identified without VT/VF

These groups of individuals were then compared to see how

Here’s what they found:

• In the group of 18 epileptics with VT/VF, 10 had an obvious cardiac cause for the heart rhythm problems and 5 had a presumed cardiovascular cause.
• In 2 of the remaining 3 epileptics with VT/VF, near–sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) was established after successful resuscitation.
• In these two, there was a higher prevalence of congenital/inherited heart disease (17% vs 1%), and they experienced VT/VF at younger age (57 vs 64 years) than VT/VF individuals without epilepsy.

Based on this, the authors concluded that the heart rhythm abnormalities that occurred in epileptic patients was a result of underlying cardiovascular disease rather than something related to the epilepsy. In other words, a “comorbidity,” or two conditions occurring at the same time but not necessarily related.

Here’s my take…

For some reason, we have been very, very, very slow to adopt what the research has been saying for decades now—that epilepsy is, at it’s root, a problem with the mitochondria in the brain cells. Due to a long list of potential problems and damage that occurs to the mitochondria, the brain cells are no longer able to function in a normal manner.

This lack of energy leads to brain cells firing before they are supposed to fire, creating a seizure. This is a concept that we dance around in treatment while never really addressing. Sadly, medications do not fix this aspect of epilepsy and some even make it worse.

Here’s the rub. The way that brain cells regulate their firing is the exact same way that the heart regulates its rhythm. It makes absolute complete sense that there is a potential for sudden cardiac death in persons with epilepsy, leading to SUDEP.

This study also highlights an additional underlying concern; epileptics need to focus on leading a brain-healthy lifestyle. This same lifestyle is inherently protective against heart disease. And yet, in this study, it seems like the participants with epilepsy actually had worse cardiovascular health than their non-epileptic counterparts.

Not good.

from Chiropractor Mesa & Tempe Arizona | Chiropractic care as it should be http://ift.tt/1S6aueO
via IFTTT

Do You Know What YOUR Child is Wearing? 5 Tips to Keep Them Safe

 

Vojtech Soukup /Dollar Photo Club

Chemicals are everywhere in our world.  I’ve said before that we live in a toxic soup, and that absolutely includes our children.

Our kids have a particular susceptibility to toxins in our environment because their detoxification ability is not as strong as an adult’s.  To make this worse, we are particularly sensitive to the plight of children and the scary fear that their pajamas may burst into flames at any given moment.

Yes.  Spontaneous combustion.  The eternal fear of lawmaking officials.

The problem is that it requires chemicals to meet the standards that are required.  There are natural materials that a naturally flame-resistant, but industry doesn’t seem interested in using these fibers.

Still all of this would be OK if we are saving lives without the cost of toxic exposure to our children while trying to prevent the almost 200 burns due to clothing in the US per year.  The current standards require the materials to resist an actual flame for a certain period of time.  Clothing that fits close to the skin is far less likely to catch on fire and does not require the higher flame resistant standards.

California sets the standard for the rest of the country when it comes to flame resistance in household materials and the rest of the country just seems to follow suit.  Which would be just fine if any of the chemicals used in the process of making children’s clothes flame retardant underwent any type of safety testing.

In other words, the use of chemicals to meet flame resistant standards is mandated, but any safety testing for these same chemicals is not required.  Quite a catch-22.

(The following information is from a viewpoint article written by Dr. Eric Hecht, Dr. David Landy and Julien Thomas)

As a way of history to show just how backwards this is, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC-the government entity that oversees this type of thing), in 1977 banned the use of CFR 2,3-dibromyopropyl phosphate one year after it was introduced.  Unfortunately, it turns out that this compound was absorbed through the skin and had the potential to cause DNA mutations.

After this, the polybrominated diphenyl esters (PBDE) took over and became the most widely used flame retardant.  That was until 2004 when concerns again arose over the toxicity of certain PBDE and these were likewise removed from the market.  These concerns ranged from endocrine disruptions, neurodevelopmental disorders and cancer.

Just in case you thought this was the end the debacle, another PBDE called decabromodiphenyl ester was banned in several states in 2013 over the same concerns.

Overall, some billion pounds of flame retardants are used annually in the US, where the typical household contains several pounds in clothing, furniture, electronics and insulation.  As these materials break down, they attach to dust particles and can make it into ours and our children’s bodies by this route as well.  This results in children in the US having toxic levels of flame retardants that are some 10 TIMES higher than other countries.

And our pets?  That’s even worse since they are much closer to the sources of these chemicals.

All of this wouldn’t be an issue if these toxic chemicals were not linked in children to neurodevelopmental disorders, lower IQs, ADD and other behavioral problems.

The regulation of these compounds is slim, and a huge chunk were grandfathered in when the Toxic Substances Control Act was passed in 1976.  Overall, this is a scenario where you need to be proactive in protecting your children from toxic exposures rather than trusting in the manufacturers and the government to ensure that products used are safe for your family.

Here are some tips:

1. For pajamas, use form fitting clothing that do not require the flame resistant standards of loose pajamas.
2. Look for clothing and toys made with naturally-flame resistant materials (this article is a great resource).
3. Consider the mattresses your family sleeps on.  Standards were changed in 2007 to include more toxic chemicals, but in my recent search for a new mattress, many of the larger manufacturers have move to naturally flame-resistant fibers to meet the standards.
4. Throw out items that have been in use for too long.  Drapes, carpets, rugs, dog beds, furniture–as these age, the toxic chemicals in them leach out into your house.
5. Purchase air filters for your home and dust, sweep and vacuum frequently to keep dust to a minimum.

For a long time, I considered the foundation to health to consist of diet, exercise and stress management.  Unfortunately, over the years which growing use of chemicals everywhere in our environment, I’ve had to add an environmental tab to this foundation.  The problem with this aspect is that is remains largely unknown to most of us, yet has a direct effect on health.

Everyone knows that the McDonald’s Big Mac they are going to eat is bad for them, but few consider the hidden danger of returning to a car after that fast food meal that has been baking in the sun for a 1/2 hour and breathing in the toxic phthalates that have been off-gassing in the heat.

Scary.

 

from Chiropractor Mesa & Tempe Arizona | Chiropractic care as it should be http://ift.tt/1S6awDl
via IFTTT

Unusual Use of Probiotics for “Feminine” Problems

YOU WANT ME TO DO WHAT WITH WHAT????!!

Over the course of hundreds of thousands of years, our bodies have formed a mutually beneficial relationship with the bacteria in our gut.  Mostly, people think of taking probiotics like lactobacillus or acidopholus for gastrointestinal issues.  However, these bacteria are also normal residents of the vaginal vault and keep the pH at the appropriate level as well as keep other bacteria and yeast from growing.  This will also prevent E. coli from making it to the urethra and causing a urinary tract infection.

Even more important, healthy bacterial flora presents the first exposure for a newborn as it travels through the birth canal, providing the right blend of bacteria for the developing immune system of the infant.  So yes, douching or (in the case of this study) adding capsules to the vaginal vault lowered the risk of bacterial vaginosis.  A much better alternative than long term use of antibiotics.

Funny how the things that seem to work are sometimes the exact opposite of what the “normal” recommendations are…

Read study here

from Chiropractor Mesa & Tempe Arizona | Chiropractic care as it should be http://ift.tt/1KrZfGz
via IFTTT

Sudden Unexpected Death in Epilepsy – Closer to an Answer?

 

SUDEP answers

Among epilepsy sufferers, one of the greatest fears is SUDEP – sudden unexplained death in epilepsy.

Maybe this is because it seems like we don’t know why it happens. Maybe it’s because it seems to happen for no reason.

SUDEP is a very real concern for people with epilepsy. People with epilepsy are at an increased risk of dying when compared to the general population who do not have seizures. Some of this increase risk is from obvious causes like drowning and motor vehicle accidents as a direct result of things that happen during a seizure.

But other deaths are not quite as clear cut. For this reason researchers are constantly searching for answers. High on the list of potential suspects is cardiac rhythm abnormalities. This particular study attempts to clarify the links between sudden cardiac arrest and epilepsy. Specifically, ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation (VT/VF) were identified. V-fib is a condition where the heart is beating out of sync. As a result, blood cannot be efficiently pumped through the heart. This is a life-threatening condition.

Ventricular tachycardia is a condition where the ventricles of the heart are beating at too fast of a rate. While not as life-threatening as V-fib, it is a sign that something is seriously wrong with the ability to control the rate that the heart is beating.

With this in mind, the researchers looked at 3 groups of participants:

1. 18 people with active epilepsy as well as ECG-confirmed VT/VF.
2. 470 individuals with VT/VF without epilepsy
3. 54 individuals with epilepsy but without identified without VT/VF

These groups of individuals were then compared to see how

Here’s what they found:

• In the group of 18 epileptics with VT/VF, 10 had an obvious cardiac cause for the heart rhythm problems and 5 had a presumed cardiovascular cause.
• In 2 of the remaining 3 epileptics with VT/VF, near–sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) was established after successful resuscitation.
• In these two, there was a higher prevalence of congenital/inherited heart disease (17% vs 1%), and they experienced VT/VF at younger age (57 vs 64 years) than VT/VF individuals without epilepsy.

Based on this, the authors concluded that the heart rhythm abnormalities that occurred in epileptic patients was a result of underlying cardiovascular disease rather than something related to the epilepsy. In other words, a “comorbidity,” or two conditions occurring at the same time but not necessarily related.

Here’s my take…

For some reason, we have been very, very, very slow to adopt what the research has been saying for decades now—that epilepsy is, at it’s root, a problem with the mitochondria in the brain cells. Due to a long list of potential problems and damage that occurs to the mitochondria, the brain cells are no longer able to function in a normal manner.

This lack of energy leads to brain cells firing before they are supposed to fire, creating a seizure. This is a concept that we dance around in treatment while never really addressing. Sadly, medications do not fix this aspect of epilepsy and some even make it worse.

Here’s the rub. The way that brain cells regulate their firing is the exact same way that the heart regulates its rhythm. It makes absolute complete sense that there is a potential for sudden cardiac death in persons with epilepsy, leading to SUDEP.

This study also highlights an additional underlying concern; epileptics need to focus on leading a brain-healthy lifestyle. This same lifestyle is inherently protective against heart disease. And yet, in this study, it seems like the participants with epilepsy actually had worse cardiovascular health than their non-epileptic counterparts.

Not good.

from Chiropractor Mesa & Tempe Arizona | Chiropractic care as it should be http://ift.tt/1gV8O77
via IFTTT

Do You Know What YOUR Child is Wearing? 5 Tips to Keep Them Safe

 

Vojtech Soukup /Dollar Photo Club

Chemicals are everywhere in our world.  I’ve said before that we live in a toxic soup, and that absolutely includes our children.

Our kids have a particular susceptibility to toxins in our environment because their detoxification ability is not as strong as an adult’s.  To make this worse, we are particularly sensitive to the plight of children and the scary fear that their pajamas may burst into flames at any given moment.

Yes.  Spontaneous combustion.  The eternal fear of lawmaking officials.

The problem is that it requires chemicals to meet the standards that are required.  There are natural materials that a naturally flame-resistant, but industry doesn’t seem interested in using these fibers.

Still all of this would be OK if we are saving lives without the cost of toxic exposure to our children while trying to prevent the almost 200 burns due to clothing in the US per year.  The current standards require the materials to resist an actual flame for a certain period of time.  Clothing that fits close to the skin is far less likely to catch on fire and does not require the higher flame resistant standards.

California sets the standard for the rest of the country when it comes to flame resistance in household materials and the rest of the country just seems to follow suit.  Which would be just fine if any of the chemicals used in the process of making children’s clothes flame retardant underwent any type of safety testing.

In other words, the use of chemicals to meet flame resistant standards is mandated, but any safety testing for these same chemicals is not required.  Quite a catch-22.

(The following information is from a viewpoint article written by Dr. Eric Hecht, Dr. David Landy and Julien Thomas)

As a way of history to show just how backwards this is, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC-the government entity that oversees this type of thing), in 1977 banned the use of CFR 2,3-dibromyopropyl phosphate one year after it was introduced.  Unfortunately, it turns out that this compound was absorbed through the skin and had the potential to cause DNA mutations.

After this, the polybrominated diphenyl esters (PBDE) took over and became the most widely used flame retardant.  That was until 2004 when concerns again arose over the toxicity of certain PBDE and these were likewise removed from the market.  These concerns ranged from endocrine disruptions, neurodevelopmental disorders and cancer.

Just in case you thought this was the end the debacle, another PBDE called decabromodiphenyl ester was banned in several states in 2013 over the same concerns.

Overall, some billion pounds of flame retardants are used annually in the US, where the typical household contains several pounds in clothing, furniture, electronics and insulation.  As these materials break down, they attach to dust particles and can make it into ours and our children’s bodies by this route as well.  This results in children in the US having toxic levels of flame retardants that are some 10 TIMES higher than other countries.

And our pets?  That’s even worse since they are much closer to the sources of these chemicals.

All of this wouldn’t be an issue if these toxic chemicals were not linked in children to neurodevelopmental disorders, lower IQs, ADD and other behavioral problems.

The regulation of these compounds is slim, and a huge chunk were grandfathered in when the Toxic Substances Control Act was passed in 1976.  Overall, this is a scenario where you need to be proactive in protecting your children from toxic exposures rather than trusting in the manufacturers and the government to ensure that products used are safe for your family.

Here are some tips:

1. For pajamas, use form fitting clothing that do not require the flame resistant standards of loose pajamas.
2. Look for clothing and toys made with naturally-flame resistant materials (this article is a great resource).
3. Consider the mattresses your family sleeps on.  Standards were changed in 2007 to include more toxic chemicals, but in my recent search for a new mattress, many of the larger manufacturers have move to naturally flame-resistant fibers to meet the standards.
4. Throw out items that have been in use for too long.  Drapes, carpets, rugs, dog beds, furniture–as these age, the toxic chemicals in them leach out into your house.
5. Purchase air filters for your home and dust, sweep and vacuum frequently to keep dust to a minimum.

For a long time, I considered the foundation to health to consist of diet, exercise and stress management.  Unfortunately, over the years which growing use of chemicals everywhere in our environment, I’ve had to add an environmental tab to this foundation.  The problem with this aspect is that is remains largely unknown to most of us, yet has a direct effect on health.

Everyone knows that the McDonald’s Big Mac they are going to eat is bad for them, but few consider the hidden danger of returning to a car after that fast food meal that has been baking in the sun for a 1/2 hour and breathing in the toxic phthalates that have been off-gassing in the heat.

Scary.

 

from Chiropractor Mesa & Tempe Arizona | Chiropractic care as it should be http://ift.tt/1CSGooh
via IFTTT

Alcohol Intake and Cancer–Add this to Negate the Risk

yahyaikiz / Dollar Photo Club

The link between breast cancer and alcohol intake has bounced back and forth between no risk and increased risk.

The past few years has seen this association settling in on the recommendation that alcohol intake does increase your risk for breast cancer. The mechanism relates to the fact that alcohol raises the level of sex-steroid hormones in the bloodstream. Since sex steroids like estrogen are clearly linked to breast cancer, it might make sense that alcohol would then increase breast cancer risk.

For most of you, this is not a good recommendation and one that has not been followed by most of the population. This also remains in conflict with the fact that the risk of many other chronic conditions are lowered by moderate alcohol intake like diabetes and heart disease.

But what if you other healthy lifestyle choices could counteract this increased risk seen with alcohol intake?

That’s just what researchers looked at in this particular study. Since dietary fiber has been shown to lower the impact of elevated sex-steroid hormone levels (via decreased blood concentration and increased sex hormone–binding globulin concentration), it would seem reasonable to assume that dietary fiber would be a good candidate for offsetting the risks of alcohol intake on hormone-dependent cancers like breast cancer.

The study included 3771 women and 2771 men who completed an initial intake and were followed for an average of 12.1 years. In this time, 297 incident hormone-dependent cancer cases, including 158 breast and 123 prostate cancers, were diagnosed. Here’s what they found:

• Higher alcohol intake was directly associated with a 36% higher risk of hormone-dependent cancers (the risk specifically for breast cancer was 70% higher with no elevated risk for prostate cancer).
• But when higher alcohol intake was combined with low fiber intake, this risk skyrocketed 76% for hormone-dependent cancer (the risk specifically for breast cancer was 253% higher and prostate cancer risk was no elevated by 37%).
• These elevated risks were NOT seen in those with the highest dietary fiber intake.

Overall, it was clear that dietary choices were able to impact the risk of hormone-dependent cancers from increase alcohol intake. This finding could go a long way towards explaining some of the discrepancies seen in prior research studies looking at the links between alcohol intake and hormone-related cancers.

 

from Chiropractor Mesa & Tempe Arizona | Chiropractic care as it should be http://ift.tt/1MhoUVD
via IFTTT

Have You Gone BPA-free? Does it Really Make a Difference?

Photo courtesy of http://ift.tt/1MfuGXE

For several years now, the BPA-free craze has been on the rise. The initial concern focused on baby’s products.

Keegan is 9 now, and I do not remember any BPA-free water bottles when he was an infant, so the public demand for these types of products began after this time. Now, I don’t think you can actually buy any products that contain BPA.

During this same timeframe, the use of BPA-free plastics has become common in other plastic products. However, BPA is present in many other commonly used items, including:

• Thermal register receipts
• The lining of aluminum cans (both drinks as well as foods)
• Other plastic bottles

Overall, it seems like society has become aware of the BPA concerns in plastics and is a least driving the market for BPA-free containers. Unfortunately, it still seems like the health implications of BPA have not quite settled in.

Let me say this—the research on the links between BPA and breast cancer, obesity and diabetes is clear and consistent. This chemical compound has distinct hormonal effects on the human body. Despite this, you can’t go ten feet without seeing someone lugging around a plastic water bottle like their life depended on it. This just seems to represent a disconnect between the health effects of BPA and the reality of its continued usage.

For the rest of you that have moved to BPA-free plastics does it really make a difference? Are the BPA-free plastics that have replaced the BPA-loaded plastics really any better?

My gut feeling has also been to be leery of all plastics. My family moved to stainless steel and glass for containers and dishware our household for quite a while now. Unless there are no additional options, we do not drink out of plastic water bottles, regardless of whether or not the bottles are BPA-free or not.

Turns out that I may not be completely off my rocker on this one. In this particular study, researchers looked at the hormonal effects of the alternative plastics that have replaced BPA. Two of the common replacement plastics contain bisphenol S (BPS) and bisphenol F (BPF).

They looked across 32 studies (25 in vitro only, and 7 in vivo—meaning in actual patients). Here’s what they found:

• The majority of these studies found the potency to be as potent as BPA.
• These mechanisms included estrogenic, antiestrogenic, androgenic, and antiandrogenic.
• BPS also has estradiol-like properties as they relate to cell proliferation, differentiation, and death.
• BPS and BPF also showed other effects in vitro and in vivo, such as altered organ weights, reproductive end points, and enzyme expression.

In other words, the plastics that have been used by industry to replace BPA are likely no better for us than the plastics we are trying to avoid.

The bottom line is that you should be doing your best to avoid plastics for both you and your family. Switch to stainless steel and glass-based products when possible.

 

from Chiropractor Mesa & Tempe Arizona | Chiropractic care as it should be http://ift.tt/1MfuFDg
via IFTTT

Taking Vitamin D? You Need to Add This Vitamin as Well

bluebay2014 / Dollar Photo Club

Prediabetes is arguably more dangerous to your health than is cigarette smoking.  For the smoker who is prediabetic, life insurance is a must.

This danger to your health stems from the fact that prediabetes and diabetes attack pretty much every organ in your body.  The blood vessels get destroyed (heart attack and stroke), the DNA of your cells gets damaged (cancer), your kidneys and your brain (Alzheimer’s dementia, cognitive loss and Parkinson’s disease).  One organ that many doctors are not aware of in the line of diabetic fire is the liver.

Non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) or non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) are two liver conditions that are very strongly linked to being prediabetic (NASH is the more progressive of the two conditions).

The principal tool for management of prediabetes and diabetes is diet.  While exercise is important, it is not as important as diet.  Avoiding environmental chemicals like plastics, styrofoam, pesticides, Teflon and flame retardants is another pillar of diabetes prevention.

That being said, there are a handful of nutrients and supplements that have a good track record for singlehandely fighting off diabetes.  The short list includes:

• Magnesium
• Vitamin D
• Fish oils and monounsaturated fats (think olive oil)
• Alpha lipoic acid
• Folic acid

Vitamin D is a supplement that I have written about extensively over the years.  What I haven’t been as outspoken about has been it’s related vitamin, vitamin A.  Both vitamins function as hormones, not vitamins.  They do this by acting on your DNA to change what a cell is doing.  Contrast this with a true vitamin, which will act as a cofactor to help an enzyme do its job.  The receptor for vitamin D and the receptor for vitamin A work together to change the way a cell behaves.

It is for this reason that some researchers feel that vitamin D toxicity is really a relative deficiency of vitamin A.  Kind of like how taking too much calcium without magnesium can cause heart rhythym problems.  This doesn’t happen because of too much calcium, but rather because there is not enough magnesium to counterbalance the higher levels of calcium.

There has been some controversy in the past about mixing vitamin D and vitamin A, with some experts recommending the use of beta carotene (the precursor to vitamin A) rather than preformed vitamin A.  But I have looked into this concern and just really haven’t found any solid research suggesting that we need to be that concerned (although I do reserve the right to change my opinion based on future research).

With all of this out of the way, we can talk about the results of this particular study.  In it, researchers looked at the relationship between blood levels of vitamin A and the likelihood of developing diabetes-related liver problems (NASH or NAFLD).  Here’s what they found:

• Blood levels of vitamin A were 47% lower in patients with NAFLD (1.42 ng/mL) and 58% lower in NASH (1.14 ng/mL) versus those without these conditions (2.70 ng/mL).
• In those without liver disease, when compared with non-prediabetic patients, vitamin A levels were 19% lower in those with “controlled” type 2 diabetes (2.87 vs. 2.32 ng/mL).
• In those with NAFLD who were prediabetic, vitamin A levels were 20% lower when compared to those with NAFLD who were not prediabetic (1.61 vs. 1.28 ng/mL).
• In those with NASH who were prediabetic, vitamin A levels were 21% lower when compared to those with NASH who were not prediabetic (1.35 vs. 1.07 ng/mL).
• Under special testing done on the liver tissue, flare ups were lower in those who had higher activation of the vitamin A : vitamin D receptor complex (RXRα mRNA expression).
• Both blood vitamin A levels and greater activation of the combined vitamin A : vitamin D receptor complex (RXRα mRNA levels) were linked to lower levels of triglyceride accumulation in the liver.

Based on this study, it is clear that vitamin A plays some type of role in protecting against both prediabetes as well as liver damage associated with prediabetes.  Given how inexpensive vitamin A is as well as how easy it is to take (much like vitamin D, vitamin A can be taken weekly).  Biotics vitamin A-Emulsion forte is the product that we use in the office.  I generally try to dose in a 1:1 ration, keeping in mind that this vitamin A has 12,500 per drop, so you’ll have to do the math depending upon how much vitamin D you are taking.

 

 

 

from Chiropractor Mesa & Tempe Arizona | Chiropractic care as it should be http://ift.tt/1I6sNKm
via IFTTT

Firmiculates Bacteria in the Gut and Pollutants in Your Diet

abhijith3747 / Dollar Photo Club

Gut bacteria and your health.  The microbiome.  These strange bedfellows play a massive role in our health and yet we know so little about how to positively impact our microbiome using lifestyle and supplementation.

Luckily, it seems like weekly there are new studies published that help to fill in the major gaps in our understanding of this relationship.  One thing that remains clear is that the types of bacteria acting as King of the Hill makes a big difference in your long term health.  Firmicutes is a class of bacteria that is generally considered anti-diabetic, anti-obesity and an overall good guy.

Bacteroidetes, on the other hand, is on the other end of the scale, increased the risk of obesity and diabetes.  It is far more common in Westernized societies while Firmicutes is found in higher levels in hunter-gatherer populations.

This is where the solidity in understanding what goes on in our microbiome stops, although it does seem like we are getting a better and better idea of how to change this bacteria in our gut to a more friendly neighbor.  Diet, of course, plays a major role.  Avoidance of antibiotics in all except the most necessary of conditions is a major factor in destroying your microbiome.  Stress can change the character of your microbiome in a matter of minutes.

Other, less obvious factors can include certain amino acids.  A recent article on glutamine demonstrated just how powerful a single amino acid could be at making positive changes in your microbiome.  Another study found positive effects using cranberry extracts.  And I’m sure there’s a bunch more I’ve missed.

But while you’re busy positively affecting your microbiome with cranberry-flavored glutamine powder, you have to remain vigilant to the environment in which we live.  I have stated before that we live in a toxic soup that most of us blissfully swim through without being aware.  Or maybe you are one of the enlightened ones.  Maybe you stick to organics for the produce found on the Dirty Dozen list.  Maybe you didn’t buy a mattress after July 2007 due to the increase in flame resistance standards and the chemicals required to withstand a Bunsen burner.

Maybe you even ditched your non-stick cookware and you would never dream of drinking out of a plastic water bottle.

If this describes you, then you’re going to feel vindicated in front of all of those friends who called you a hippie and a health freak.  In this particular article, researchers looked at the effects of persistent organic pollutants (POPs) on the microbiome.  In this mouse study, researchers exposed the animals to a specific POP called 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzofuran (TCDF).  This compound is sometimes referred to as a dioxin (although it is better described as dioxin-ish) and we are typically exposed to it through the food we eat.

Most common exposures are through diet and, more specifically, animal products.  This is because, like heavy metals, animals cannot get rid of persistent organic pollutants so they just keep getting concentrated up the food chain.  This makes it very difficult to actually avoid exposure to POPs, although there are things you can do to reduce your exposure.  More on that in a bit.

In the study, mice were given a high dose of TCDF along with their food for five days.  The dose was 1,000 times the level that we are normally exposed to TCDF in our food supply, but the levels are in line with high dose occupational exposures.  Here’s what they found:

• There was a shift in the gut microbiota Firmicutes to Bacteroidetes (not good).
• There changes in bile acid metabolism.
• The TCDF triggered inflammation and changed the way the liver was handling and storing both fat and glucose.

Granted, the levels of exposure were very high, but in a linked editorial, it was noted that further studies at dosages more in line with human exposures are showing the same types of negative changes in the gut microbiome.

So what can you do?  While you cannot avoid exposure completely, here are some tips:

1. Considering that POPs are retained in animal tissues, living a vegetarian, vegan or plant-based lifestyle will lower your risk.
2. If you do consume animal products, it would make sense that organic sources of  food would have lower levels of POPs.
3. Lifestyle choices that promote growth of Firmicutes (as noted above) can counteract the chemical exposure-related changes.

For me, one of the scariest and most insightful things that I glean from studies like this is that so many of the negative consequences of our lifestyle choices are mediated through the gut bacteria.  Just how much of a role do these bacteria play?  In other words, it is well established that chemical compounds like POPs are associated with diabetes and obesity and certain cancers.  But is it the actual chemical compounds themselves causing problems internally, or is it that these chemicals are altering the gut microbiome and THIS is how these chronic conditions are created?

I’m sure it is a combination of the two, but what does this say about the importance of maintaining a good, solid, healthy microbiome?  Personally, I think it says everything.

 

from Chiropractor Mesa & Tempe Arizona | Chiropractic care as it should be http://ift.tt/1Rs4Cfz
via IFTTT

Common Knee Osteoarthritis Symptom Treatment Fails Again

Knee arthritis and steroid injections

 

Knee osteoarthritis symptoms. For some, it seems like the diagnosis is pretty much the same as saying that surgery is inevitable.

There are times when I think that more information is a bad thing.  There have been countless times in my practice where someone gets hooked on imaging findings (whether they are MRI, CT scans or X-rays) and focuses on what damage is present rather then what is reality.

Whether it’s a shoulder, low back, neck or knee imaging study, there have been multiple studies pointing out two very important problems.  First, there is very little correlation between imaging findings and symptoms.  In other words, if someone has “stuff” wrong on a MRI, it does NOT mean this person is going to have pain.  You cannot look at a MRI and state that this patient will or will not have pain.

This misconception then leads to the second problem.  There is a large chunk of the surgical field that is devoted to doing procedures based on stuff we find on imaging.  Got a disc bulge?  Cut it out.  Have knee osteoarthritis?  Replace the knee.  Torn rotator cuff?  Surgical repair of the shoulder.

This particular study highlights just how wrong this approach is.  In yet another study on the relationship between arthroscopic surgery of the knee for arthritis found on imaging and beneficial outcomes of the surgery, researchers looked at the results across 9 different medical trials.  Specifically, these middle aged and older patients with knee pain and degenerative knee disease underwent knee arthroscopic surgery.  Here’s what they found after an average of 2 years had passed after the surgeries:

• There was a very small benefit to surgery in patients’ pain levels (basically, a benefit of 2.4 mm on a 0-100 mm scale).
• There was no significant benefit on physical function.
• Harms included symptomatic deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, infection, and death.

The bottom line is that, going in for surgery just to “clean out” the knee has virtually no benefit but a list of risks.  This is a procedure that, frankly, should no longer be done except in rare cases (and I don’t know exactly what these cases might look like…).

So what can you do instead of surgery?

1. Move.  Not exercising is one of the worst possible things you can do for knee arthritis.  Hiking, swimming, weights, stationary bike, whole body vibration–there are lots of things you can do to strengthen your knees.
2. Find a chiropractic who can competently treat the soft tissues of the knees–look for those that do Graston, ART, NMR, fascial manipulation.
3. Consider a TENS unit to control the pain in the short run.
4. Consider a joint support formula with glucosamine in it.
5. Add vitamin D to your supplement list.
6. Get down to your ideal body weight.

By using these tools to help manage your knee osteoarthritis symptoms, you won’t ever need to worry about whether or not the risks of surgery outweigh the miniscule benefits.

 

from Chiropractor Mesa & Tempe Arizona | Chiropractic care as it should be http://ift.tt/1dSj11Y
via IFTTT

Appendicitis Concerns: Don’t Rush to Have it Removed

chanawit / Dollar Photo Club

 

The common belief is that, if your appendix becomes inflamed and infected, it needs to come out now.  As in like “emergency surgery” now.

It’s one of those situations where you would never think about doing a randomized study on it because it would be withholding life-saving medical treatment from those in the placebo group.  Kind of like surgery to remove a tumor.  Or like a clinical study to see if parachutes really do save lives.

It takes some forward thinking individuals to really challenge the status quo, and even once it has been challenged, it still takes years or sometimes decades before real change occurs.  A perfect current example is arthroscopic knee surgery to go in and “clean out” the knee.  Surgeons all thought it was a requirement to go in and clean everything out.  At least until the VA did a placebo-controlled study on arthroscopic surgery of the knee and found that, after a year, there was no difference in the patients who had surgery and the patients who only thought they had surgery.

Years later, surgeons still refuse to change behaviors despite the strong evidence that they are not actually helping knee pain patients.

Dogma rules.

Back to your appendix.  It has only been recently that scientists have determined that your appendix really does have a use.  For pretty much ever, science believed that the appendix was a vestigial organ — and organ that we may have needed a million years ago but don’t need today.  It is believed that the appendix basically acts as a storage organ for bacteria to repopulate the gut after a severe infection in the gut such as cholera or Salmonella.

Sounds like a good idea to me, especially considering how important the bacteria in your gut are for health.

This was, of course, before the time of heavy duty antibiotics that can pretty much wipe the slate of your gut clean of all the bacteria that we’d like to have growing there, leaving other bacteria that we do not want growing to thrive, like the Clostridia family (think C. diff infections).

But when your appendix becomes infected and inflamed, what options do you have?  As mentioned, surgery is generally considered the only option.  But, just like so many other procedures that we take for granted are the best options, the answer is not always so clear.  In this particular study, researchers looked at what happened when uncomplicated acute appendicitis was treated with antibiotics instead of surgery in 530 patients with CT-confirmed appendicitis (this is not the time to bring up ultrasound versus radiation overload CT-scanning…).   For reference, uncomplicated appendicitis refers to an infection of the appendix that does not involve a perforation or an abscess formation.

Patients were given either antibiotics (intravenous ertapenem @ 1 g/day for 3 days followed by 7 days of oral levofloxacin @ 500 mg once daily and metronidazole @ 500 mg 3 times per day) or had surgery to remove the appendix.  Here’s what happened:

• In the antibiotic group, 70 patients (27.3%) still ended up undergoing an appendectomy within 1 year.  The remaining 186 (72.7%) avoided surgery.
•  Of the 70 patients in the antibiotic group who ended up having surgery, 58 (82.9%) had uncomplicated appendicitis, 7 (10.0%) had complicated acute appendicitis and 5 (7.1%) did not have appendicitis but received appendectomy for suspected recurrence.
• There were no abscesses or other major complications associated with having a delayed appendectomy.

In other words, darn near 3/4 of these patients did NOT need to have an organ they were born with removed.  Granted, the rather large doses of antibiotics given in the non-surgical group presents its own set of problems, but when balanced against the removal of an organ that we don’t know all that much about, but deals with bacterial flora in the gut, I think I’d take the antibiotics.  Besides–you’re still going to get a hefty antibiotic dosing if you had surgery anyway, so why not try to save the organ?

What’s nice to know is that, out of 256 patients who received the antibiotics, only 7 (2.7%) later presented with a more complicated infection.  Those are pretty good odds.

One other thing to consider.  What would have happened if the antibiotic group were followed up with high dose probiotics to combat the ill effects of the antibiotics?  Personally, I think there’s a very large possibility that the 27.3% of patients who still needed surgery would be a much smaller group.

 

from Chiropractor Mesa & Tempe Arizona | Chiropractic care as it should be http://ift.tt/1JPx1rE
via IFTTT

Too Young for Your Brain to Rot? Results Will Surprise You

chrisharvey / Dollar Photo Club

Sure, you know that a daily meth habit will fry your brain. But what if over half of 40-somethings had brain damage? Couldn’t be possible, right?

Alzheimer’s dementia, memory loss, cognitive decline, Parkinson’s…these all happen to OLDER people, so you’re safe.  You gave up the obvious brain-damaging behaviors after college and you’re pretty sure your neurons have recovered enough to last you until your grandkids get married.

Besides, you take all those nutrients that we know protect the brain–magnesium, fish oils, ginko and vitamin D–so you’re even better off.  And if there really was some dastardly virus or bacteria or toxic chemical destroying your brain you would’ve read about it in Newsweek or there would be a Hollywood blockbuster with Julia Roberts as the hotshot young attorney taking on Monsanto for dumping hazardous waste into the Potomac resulting in children being born with an extra arm.

Nope.  Reality is far more sinister.

Neurodegenerative disorders like Alzheimer’s dementia and Parkinson’s disease have long been considered a Type 3 diabetes because the links between poor sugar handling and these conditions is so strong.  I’ve taught classes on this topic for several years and most of the participants in the classes were unaware of the strong links.

Even fewer still are aware that these links exist for PRE diabetes as well.  Prediabetes–that condition that is found is about HALF of the industrialized world.  That means there’s a good chance that you fall into this category.

Carrying too much weight around the middle?  Cholesterol problems?  Liver enzymes elevated?  Had your gallbladder out?  Ringing in your ears?  High blood pressure?

Doesn’t apply to you?  How about liver enzymes still normal, but in the top half of “normal?”  How about high normal glucose levels?  How about a combination of “normal” trigylcerides at the higher end and “normal” HDL levels at the low end?  Is your blood pressure over 120 systolic (WITHOUT meds)?

The point is, while you may not think you’re prediabetic (or even if your doctor told you that you’re not), there’s a very good chance that you are.  In which case, the results of this particular study should be a great interest to you.  In it, researchers looked at a group of 2,216 men and women at an average age of FORTY to see about the relationship between blood sugar and brain health.  This is important, because we’re not talking about an 80 year old in a retirement community.  Here’s what they found:

• Diabetes was associated with worse memory, visual perception, and attention performance.
• Diabetes was also associated with higher “white matter hyperintensities”–a sign of damage to the cells of your brain.
• Diabetics also had lower cerebral brain and occipital lobar gray matter volumes.  In other words–their brains were shrunk.
• Here’s the kicker–increased fasting blood sugar was also associated with shrinkage of large areas of gray matter.

With the last detail we are no longer talking about diabetics (who, at some level, probably understand that diabetes is slowly destroying every part of their bodies) but also the prediabetics.  That’s a huge chunk of the population that has already begun to lose brain cells at a very early age.  Fast forward another 20, 30 or 40 years and there’s not likely going to be much left to finish a Sudoku puzzle.

The bottom line is that, if you care about your brain at all (and really…you should) and you have even the slightest concern that you are prediabetic or have any of the things listed about, you need to start NOW with a lifestyle revamping (feel free to check out my Diabetes eBook for some help by clicking here).  The brain damage is already occurring.  You may never get it back.

 

from Chiropractor Mesa & Tempe Arizona | Chiropractic care as it should be http://ift.tt/1KBkTdX
via IFTTT

Want to Add More Muscle Mass? Use This Simple Trick Before Bed

rasstock / Dollar Photo Club

Admit it.  You’d like to be built just a little more like the Rock or Jennifer Aniston, especially if it wouldn’t take much work.

Hate to disappoint you, but it’s not going to be that easy.  But every little bit helps.  And exercise is going to have to be a part of it.  You can’t hook up some cheesy As-Seen-On-TV electronic gadgets to your abs while watching the Walking Dead and expect to make it to the cast of Magic Mike IV.  And there certainly isn’t any fat burning supplement you can buy at GNC that’s going to work magic either.

Dietary choices and exercise have to be a part of the equation.  Both resistance and aerobic (although I have pointed out in prior articles that resistance training IS aerobic training).

If you browse the shelves of your local healthfood store (or worse, a national chain supplement store) you’ll see all kinds of products geared towards weight lifting and bodybuilding.  Quite frankly, most of these are junk products promoted through a mutation of the medical research.

Take the “NO-______” products (fill in the blank…explode, explosion, burst, etc…) that are loaded with the amino acid arginine.  Yes, arginine is a precursor to nitric oxide that helps to open up blood vessels.  This led to the mistaken idea that putting arginine into an awful tasting drink mix will open up blood flow to the muscles and allow a stronger set when lifting.  And these products aren’t cheap.

Of course, for many Americans, the most important thing is to actually HAVE a workout.  But once you’re past that hurdle, there really are some solid approaches that can help you improve the outcomes from your workouts.  Probably one of the more tried and true is the use of creatine.  Creatine is used by the muscles to make a short-term energy source called phosphocreatine.  More phosphocreatine leads to a better short term energy boost, allowing for that extra rep or even an extra set.

Another popular approach is the use of protein supplements.  The list of available products is quite long and varied and can be purchased anywhere from the aforementioned health food store to Walmart and Costco.  Unfotunately, many of these products are junk and loaded with artificial sweeteners and should be avoided by anyone serious about getting in shape.  In reality, you can likely get just as good of a boost of amino acids from eating a chicken breast or bison burger.

And maybe an even more important question should be the “when” of taking protein powders.  Since most of our muscle recovery and healing occurs while we are sleeping, it does seem like this might be a good time to make sure our bodies have a decent supply of amino acids to work with.  Despite this, most gym-goers seem to indulge in protein shake homage either in the morning or immediately after a workout.

If this fits you, it’s possible that this particular study may change your mind.  In it, researchers took 44 young men (21-23 years old) in a progressive, 12-week resistance exercise training program and split them into two groups.  One group took a protein supplement with 27.5 g of protein, 15 g of carbohydrate, and 0.1 g of fat every night before going to bed.  The other group received a non-calorie placebo drink.

Outcomes were assessed using a whole-body (dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry), limb (computed tomography scan), and muscle fiber (muscle biopsy specimen) level before and after exercise training. Strength was assessed using a 1-repetition maximum strength testing.  Here’s what they found:

• Muscle strength increased 26% more in the protein-supplemented group (74.5 pounds versus 59.0 pounds).
• The size of the quadriceps muscle (cross-sectional area) increased 75% more in the protein group (8.4 cm² vs. 4.8 cm²).
• There was a 129% greater increase in type II (fast-twitch) muscle fiber size in the protein group (2319 μm² versus 1017 μm²).

I don’t know about you, but getting a pretty significant boost in outcomes from the SAME workout sure sounds like a good thing to me.  But remember, this group was involved in a 3 month progressive exercise routine to go along with the protein supplement.  That being said, here are some decent options for protein powders that you can find on Amazon (I’m somewhat partial to plant-based proteins):

1. Orgain organic plant based protein powder
2. Garden of Life RAW organic protein (this brand had some problems with heavy metals last year, but this seems to have been resolved)
3. Vega sport performance
4. Or, if you happened to read my prior article on the powerful effects of glutamine on your gut bacteria, you may be able to kill two birds with one stone by trying a glutamine powder.

Let me know if this works for you…

 

from Chiropractor Mesa & Tempe Arizona | Chiropractic care as it should be http://ift.tt/1LZK33o
via IFTTT

Probiotics; Should You Take Them Short or Long Term?

abhijith3747 / Dollar Photo Club

A large chunk of the probiotic-popping population uses them only after a course of antibiotics, but would you be better off taking probiotics on a regular basis?

The human species’ exposure to bacteria over the course of history was largely due to fermented or buried foods.  To preserve different foods, our ancestors buried these foods in the soil.  Through this, our ancestor’s exposure to bacteria was most likely daily.

Oh–and they didn’t have antibacterial soap.

We live in such a sterile environment from birth to death that our traditional exposures to beneficial bacteria has almost been completely wiped out.  Couple this with antibiotic use in farming and antibiotics being given out with the lollipops at the pediatrician’s office and you can pretty much guarantee that the bacteria we should have cohabitating with us are consistently being annihilated.

This leaves our immune system without balance and proper training and it also leaves room for less-than-desirable bacteria to grow in places we don’t need them to grow.  Kill off Lactobacillis with antibiotics (or antibacterial mouthwash) in the pharynx (back of the throat) and Staph and Strep bacteria have a party, increasing your risk of ear infections and sore throats.  And guess what we use to treat these conditions?

Kind of circular, don’t you think?

Back to my original comment.  Society still considers the use of probiotics to be limited to using them after a course of antibiotics or using them with antibiotics to prevent antibiotic-associated diarrhea.  Here’s a newsflash:

The wanton destruction of beneficial bacteria in the gut is so massive that a mere course of probiotics will do little to fix the damage (in my opinion, anyway).  In reality, recovering from antibiotic use will likely take YEARS of consistent probiotic use coupled with dietary choices designed to support the growth of beneficial bacteria.

Which brings us to this particular study.  In this interesting little tidbit of medical literature, researchers looked to see whether the use of the probiotic Bifidobacterium longum R0175 (given as a microencapsulated product) would affect the absorption of the protective flavanones from orange juice (specifically, hesperetin-O-glucuronides, naringenin-O-glucuronides, and hesperetin-3′-O-sulfate). Here’s what they found:

• 24-hour absorption of flavanones was similar when OJ was consumed with or without probiotic intake (about 22% of the flavanones were absorbed with probiotics,  21% without).
• However, orange juice given after 4 weeks of probiotic use resulted in an pretty strong jump in the absorption of these protective compounds (27% were absorbed without probiotics, 43% after 4 weeks of probiotic use).
• There were no changes in the bacterial profiles of stools nor the stool moisture, weight, pH, or levels of short-chain fatty acids and phenols.

Having the right bacteria growing in your gut gives you the power to extract more protective compounds from the foods you eat.  How’s that for a statement?

Let’s change the context: A single course of antibiotics has the power to destroy your ability to fully extract the true benefits of the foods you eat, increasing your risk of conditions like obesity, diabetes, heart disease, Alzheimer’s and cancer.

THAT is a strong statement.

In the meantime, it certainly makes good sense to find a good quality probiotic and consider taking it on a daily basis, not just after you’ve wiped out your bacterial flora from yet another course of Cipro.

 

from Chiropractor Mesa & Tempe Arizona | Chiropractic care as it should be http://ift.tt/1H3Uem1
via IFTTT