Dr. Steve Chaney, Author at Health Tips From The Professor

Shoulder Joint Pain Relief

October 18, 2016 by Dr. Steve Chaney

Author: Julie Donnelly, LMT –The Pain Relief Expert

Editor: Dr. Steve Chaney

Shoulder joint pain was preventing a father from throwing a baseball to his son and he was very distressed. He needed should joint pain relief in the worst way. He was complaining to a friend of his who is a client of mine. Even though he had been recommended to go for surgery, his friend convinced him to give muscle therapy a chance. So yesterday “Frank” came in to see me.

He demonstrated throwing a ball, but he could barely lift his arm, and he definitely couldn’t bring it back. He said that his time with his son is precious to him, and that their favorite pastime is throwing a baseball. If I could just help him do that, he would be happy.

Why Muscles Cause Shoulder Joint Pain

Your shoulder has more muscle attachments than any other joint in your body. A muscle pulls in only one direction, muscles never push. When you consider all the movements you can make with your shoulder and arm, you can see why there are so many muscles involved.

The important fact is when a muscle is shortened from spasms, it will cause pain at its insertion point on the bone at the shoulder joint.

The reason is evident when you consider an analogy I frequently use to describe joint pain. If you pull your hair at the end, it hurts at your scalp. However, you don’t need to massage your scalp, you don’t need to take aspirin for the headache, and you definitely don’t need brain surgery! You just need to let go of your hair!

The exact same thing is true to stop your shoulder joint pain. You just need to let go of the tight muscles that insert into your shoulder.

The Muscles That Cause Shoulder Joint Pain

Perhaps you’ve heard of the rotator cuff muscles: supraspinatus, infraspinatus, teres minor, and subscapularis. However, my experience has proven that there are a lot of other muscles that aren’t considered shoulder muscles, but that will cause shoulder joint pain. Those muscles are your biceps and triceps, your levator scapulae, and your latissimus dorsi (among others).

While not rotator cuff muscles, your biceps and triceps both originate deep within your shoulder joint. The other two muscles will move your shoulder blade (scapula). When they are in spasm, which shortens the muscle fibers, it will cause a strain to be placed on the muscle tendon, which will then cause a strain, and pain, on your shoulder joint.

How To Release Shoulder Joint Pain

There are so many muscles involved in shoulder joint pain that I couldn’t show all of them here, that’s why I wrote Treat Yourself to Pain-Free Living.

However, I do want to show you how to do one treatment for your infraspinatus muscle.

But first, back to “Frank.” I treated each of the muscles mentioned, and then using Treat Yourself to Pain-Free Living, I showed him how to treat each of the muscles of his shoulder. He was thrilled! He could easily, and painlessly, throw a baseball. In fact, he went outside and tried it just to make sure.

The key is self-treatment. Muscles will again shorten up until you train them to be their normal, longer, length. You can’t go to a therapist as often as necessary to make the muscles return to their proper length. However, you can treat yourself every day! That’s how you really stay flexible and pain-free — frequent self-treatment.

An Easy Treatment For Shoulder Joint Pain

The following pictures are from Treat Yourself to Pain-Free Living

Step 1: To treat your left infraspinatus, put the Perfect Ball in your right hand and bring it under your arm, going back as far as you can so you are on top of your infraspinatus muscle.

Step 2: Lean into a wall. Find the “hot spot” (the spasm). You’ll know you’re on it because it will hurt.

Step 3: Stay still for 30-60 seconds, then move a little bit to roll the ball back and forth on the muscle.

Treat Yourself to Pain-Free Living will explain this further, and will give you pictures and descriptions of how to self-treat the other muscles that cause shoulder joint pain.

It just takes a little bit of direction and effort to learn how to self-treat. But, I’ve seen so many times that you CAN stop shoulder joint pain!

Wishing you well,

Julie Donnelly

About The Author

Julie Donnelly is a Deep Muscle Massage Therapist with 20 years of experience specializing in the treatment of chronic joint pain and sports injuries. She has worked extensively with elite athletes and patients who have been unsuccessful at finding relief through the more conventional therapies.

She has been widely published, both on – and off – line, in magazines, newsletters, and newspapers around the country. She is also often chosen to speak at national conventions, medical schools, and health facilities nationwide.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

Folic Acid vs. Folate

October 11, 2016 by Dr. Steve Chaney

Are Supplement Manufacturers Trying to Mislead You?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

There has been much confusion on folic acid vs. folate. For example, I recently received this question from a reader:

“I have gotten so much clarification about folic acid from your video – thank you!
But I have another question I was hoping you could answer.

When a supplement label states there is “folate” rather than “folic acid”, is there really a difference between the two? I hear women telling each other to only use the one that says folate because it’s made from food. And folic acid isn’t. These women are also paying more money for these products because of this. Is this true? (And I’m not talking about tetrahydrafolate, either)
I’ve been told by one manufacturer that they label it as folic acid, but they know other companies who use the exact same source of folic acid. Still, they put folate on their label, possibly to avoid controversy.
Are these women being duped? Should they be asking the manufacturer certain questions for clarification?”

The video, this reader is referring to is my “The Truth About Methyl Folate” video in which I debunk the many myths about methyl folate circulating on the internet, and, unfortunately, repeated by some doctors.

However, the reader is correct. I did not address the folic acid vs. folate nomenclature in that video. I will attempt to clarify it in this article.

Folic Acid vs. Folate

A Rose By Any Other Name

I call this section “A Rose By Any Other Name” from the famous Shakespeare quote from Romeo and Juliet “A rose by any other names would smell as sweet”.

Biochemists and nutritionists use the terms folic acid and folate interchangeably. There is a sound chemical rationale for that.

Folic acid has a glutamic acid residue on one end. Thus, folic acid is what chemists refer to as an organic acid, specifically a carboxylic acid. Under acidic conditions the appropriate suffix for an organic acid is “ic”. However, under neutral or alkaline conditions, organic acids lose their protons. Once that happens, the appropriate suffix is “ate”.

The exact pH of vitamin pills may vary from brand to brand. In our body our stomach is acidic, our intestines are alkaline, and our blood and cells are normally near neutral. Thus, vitamin B9 could correctly be labeled either folic acid or folate in supplements. It will be folic acid in our stomach and will be folate in our intestines, bloodstream, and cells. Beginning to see the difference between folic acid vs. folate?

The bottom line is that nobody is trying to trick you by using the term folate for the vitamin B9 on their supplement label. Furthermore, whether the label says folic acid or folate, the actual vitamin B9 will be in both the folic acid and folate form as it travels through your body.

In answer to your other question, since folic acid and folate are two names for the same molecule, folate is not more natural than folic acid. If someone is charging you extra because they use the term folate on their label, they are ripping you off.

What About Tetrahydrofolate?

The person who sent me the question also asked about tetrahydrofolates. Here the story gets a bit murkier. As folic acid or folate enters our cells, three things immediately happen:

It is reduced to tetrahydrofolate. That terminology simply means that 4 hydrogens have been added to the molecule.

A string of glutamic acid residues is added. That traps it inside the cells.

It is converted to a half dozen different derivatives that play important metabolic roles in the cell. N5-methyltetrahydrofolate (commonly referred to as methyl folate) is one of these metabolically active compounds.

This is where it gets confusing. Nutritionists also refer to all of these tetrahydrofolate derivatives as folates. My guess is that years ago some genius must have decided that the term tetrahydrofolate was too long and complicated for the general public.

In my view lumping everything together under the term folate has turned out to be more confusing in the long run. However, I do have the advantage of hindsight. It’s easy to point out mistakes after they are made.

However, this is where all of the confusion arises. It’s because the term folate can mean so many different things. Here are a few fast facts to help clarify the confusion.

Folates in food are in the tetrahydrofolate form. Tetrahydrofolate in foods is, in fact, more natural than folic acid or folate in supplements. However, tetrahydrofolates in foods are utilized only about half as well as folic acid or folate in supplements. In addition, most of us don’t eat enough high-folate foods.

In contrast, tetrahydrofolate in a supplement is not more natural than folic acid. That’s because:

It would require one cup of lentils or two cups of spinach to provide the RDA level of tetrahydrofolate in a single vitamin tablet. That’s just one tablet. You do the math! If someone tells you that the folate in their supplement came from foods, they will lie to you about other things as well.

In fact, the tetrahydrofolate found in supplements is chemically synthesized from folic acid. It can never be more natural than folic acid.

Supplements containing tetrahydrofolate are no better utilized than supplements containing folic acid when you measure their ability to increase cellular tetrahydrofolate levels (the only measure that really matters).

The bottom line is that even if folate on the label were to refer to tetrahydrofolate, it is not from food. It is not more natural than folic acid. It is not better utilized than folic acid. If someone is charging you a higher price for that supplement, they are ripping you off.

Debunking The Methyl Folate Myths

Methyl folate has become an internet sensation. If you believe all the hype, everyone should be using supplements containing methyl folate rather than folic acid. In fact, some of the claims made by manufacturers who sell methyl folate supplements are downright deceptive.

Unfortunately, there are even medical doctors touting the wonders of methyl folate and offering all sorts of plausible sounding biochemical explanations about why it is superior to folic acid. My take on that is that I try not to practice medicine when I write my articles. I have neither the training nor the degree to do that. In turn, I would ask medical doctors to stop trying to practice biochemistry.

As I said at the beginning of this article, I have produced a video, “The Truth About Methyl Folate,” in which I debunk all the many methyl folate myths circulating on the internet. If you would like the “Cliff Notes” version, here it is:

Supplements containing methyl folate do not get their methyl folate from foods.

Methyl folate in supplements is chemically synthesized and is not more natural than folic acid.

Folic acid and methyl folate in supplements are equally well utilized by the body, even in individuals with a MTHFR deficiency.

Excess folic acid does not cause cancer.

If you would like the science and the references behind those statements, I invite you to view my video.

I hope you now understand folic acid vs. folates. If not, please feel free to reach out to me.

The Bottom Line

A reader recently asked me to clear up the confusion about why the terms folic acid vs. folate are used interchangeably on supplement labels to describe vitamin B9.

That terminology is based on simple chemistry. Folic acid and folate are two names for the same molecule. Under acidic conditions, it is called folic acid. Under neutral or alkaline conditions, it is called folate.

Since folic acid and folate are two names for the same molecule, folate is not more natural than folic acid. If someone is charging you extra because they use the term folate on their label, they are ripping you off.

In the cell folate is reduced to tetrahydrofolate and a number of metabolically active derivatives of tetrahydrofolate are formed. Unfortunately, these compounds are also referred to as folates. This terminology has a historical basis rather than a chemical basis and is confusing.

If you see the term tetrahydrofolate on your supplement label, you need to know that it is not from food. It is not more natural than folic acid. It is not better utilized than folic acid. If someone is charging you a higher price for that supplement, they are also ripping you off.

I have produced a video called “The Truth About Methyl Folate” to debunk the many methyl folate myths on the internet. In the article above, you will find the “Cliff Notes” version of the video.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

Prenatal DHA Supplement

October 4, 2016 by Dr. Steve Chaney

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

Is taking a prenatal DHA supplement wise for brain health?

There are lots of reasons to think that DHA supplementation may be important for healthy brain development.

DHA is a major component of the myelin sheath that coats every neuron in the brain.

Just as the plastic coating on copper wire allows it to conduct an electrical current, the myelin sheath allows neurons to conduct nerve impulses from one end of the neuron to the other. In short, the myelin sheath is absolutely essential for brain function.

Unlike many of the other components of the myelin sheath, the body cannot make DHA. It must be provided by the diet.

Recent studies have suggested that most women in the United States and Canada do not get sufficient amounts of the omega-3s EPA and DHA in their diet.

Animal studies show that DHA deficiency during pregnancy interferes with normal brain and eye development.

With all that circumstantial evidence, it would seem obvious that a prenatal DHA supplement would be important for healthy brain development in infants and children. However, clinical studies have been all over the map.

Some studies have reported that DHA supplementation during pregnancy improves cognition, attention span, behavior or reading skills in both infants and children. Other studies have shown no effect of DHA supplementation on those parameters. There is no consensus on this very important question.

Thus, when I saw a recent study titled “Prenatal Supplementation with DHA Improves Attention At 5 Years Of Age: A Randomized Controlled Trial” (U Ramakrishnan et al, American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, doi: 10.3945/ajcn.114.101071, 2016), I decided to Investigate.

Does Taking a Prenatal DHA Supplement Improve Attention Span?

In this study 1094 Mexican women were randomly assigned to receive either 400 mg of DHA or a placebo containing corn and soy oil starting in the second trimester of pregnancy (a time at which myelination and brain development begins) until delivery. Of the women enrolled in the study, 973 of them gave birth to healthy babies.

The investigators were able to follow up with 797 (82%) of those children at age 5 and conducted tests to measure overall cognitive function, behavior, and attention span.

There were no differences in overall cognitive development or behavior between the two groups.

The children from mothers who supplemented with DHA performed significantly better in tests of attention span. They were much less likely to be distracted by external stimuli than the children from mothers not supplementing with DHA.

In short, this study suggested that supplementation with DHA during pregnancy produced children who were less likely to suffer from attention deficit disorders at age 5.

This study had a number of strengths:

It was a fairly large study (797 children).

Supplementation was with pure DHA rather than with a mixture of EPA, DHA, and other omega-3 fatty acids.

The population was from an urban area of Mexico where omega-3 intake is generally low, so it was likely that many of the women were DHA-deficient at the beginning of the study.

However, it also had some glaring weaknesses:

The DHA status of the women was not measured either at baseline or after supplementation.

The quality of the child’s learning environment was not measured.

In short, the study was neither better or worse than the many other published studies.

Why Is There So Much Confusion?

To try and clear up the confusion I have also analyzed many of the other published studies in this field. There were things not to like about every study, but there was no obvious reason why some studies showed a positive effect of DHA supplementation and others failed to see any benefit. This is not unusual for human nutrition clinical studies, but it is frustrating.

However, when you look at the totality of the studies in this field there is one obvious reason why there is so much confusion. There is no uniformity in experimental design. No two studies are alike.

The published studies differ in:

The composition of omega-3s. Some studies are done with pure DHA. Others with mixtures of EPA and DHA and with varying ratios of EPA to DHA.

The amount of DHA. Studies range from 100 mg/day to 800 mg/day.

When the DHA is given. Some studies give the DHA to the pregnant mothers. Others give DHA to infants or to children of various ages.

Even worse, most of the published studies to date have not measured omega-3 status prior to supplementation, nor have they documented an improvement in omega-3 status with supplementation. Obviously, DHA supplementation is most likely to be beneficial for individuals who were DHA-deficient at the beginning of the study.

Until there is some uniformity in experimental design and DHA status is routinely measured, it is likely that the confusion will continue and this important question will remain unanswered.

Should Pregnant Women Take a Prenatal DHA Supplement?

If we were to assume that most American women were getting enough omega-3s in their diet, and the consequences of DHA deficiency were relatively minor, this would be merely an academic discussion. We could afford to wait years until scientists were able to come to a consensus.

However, neither of those assumptions are true:

One recent study reported that the United States and Canada rated last in the world with respect to omega-3 intake.

Another study reported that 75% of Canadian women were not getting enough omega-3s during pregnancy. Other studies suggest that the situation is very similar in the United States.

If any of the reported consequences (short attention span, cognitive deficits, and behavioral problems) of DHA-deficiency during pregnancy and childhood are true and they are preventable with DHA supplementation, this information is of vital importance to every woman during her child bearing years.

In short, inadequate DHA intake is so widespread and the possible consequences of DHA deficiency during pregnancy are so important that, in my opinion, a prenatal DHA supplement only makes sense. Pregnant women can’t afford to wait until we are absolutely sure that DHA supplementation is essential.

The only caveat to this recommendation is to make sure that the DHA you are getting is pure. Our oceans are increasingly polluted. Many fish and some fish oil supplements are contaminated with heavy metals and/or PCBs. Only use omega-3 and/or DHA supplements from manufacturers that use very stringent quality controls to assure their products are pure.

The Bottom Line

A recent study has reported that DHA supplementation during pregnancy improves attention span in children at age 5.

Unfortunately, there is no consensus in this field. Some studies have come to similar conclusions while others have seen no effect of DHA supplementation during pregnancy.

If we were to assume that omega-3 deficiency was rare in this country and the consequences of DHA deficiency during pregnancy were inconsequential, this would be an academic discussion. Pregnant women could wait for scientists to reach consensus before deciding whether or not to supplement with DHA. However, neither of those studies are true.

Studies show that most women in the US and Canada do not get adequate omega-3s during pregnancy.

If any of the reported consequences of DHA deficiency during pregnancy are true and they are preventable with DHA supplementation, this information is of vital importance to every woman during her pregnancy.

In short, inadequate DHA intake is so widespread and the possible consequences of DHA deficiency during pregnancy are so important that, in my opinion, DHA supplementation during pregnancy only makes sense. Pregnant women can’t afford to wait until we are absolutely sure that DHA supplementation is essential.

The only caveat to this recommendation is to make sure that the DHA you are getting is pure. Our oceans are increasingly polluted. Many fish and some fish oil supplements are contaminated with heavy metals and/or PCBs. Only use omega-3 and/or DHA supplements from manufacturers that use very stringent quality controls to assure their products are pure.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

Should We Take Calcium Supplements?

September 27, 2016 by Dr. Steve Chaney

Clearing Up The Calcium Confusion

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

Should we take calcium supplements? You have every right to be confused about calcium supplementation. There have been a lot of conflicting headlines in recent months.

It has seemed like a no-brainer for years that calcium supplementation could help post-menopausal women and men over 50 avoid the debilitating effects of osteoporosis.

After all:

>99% of adults fail to get the USDA recommended 2.5-3 servings/day of dairy products.

67% of women ages 19-50 and 90% of women over 50 fail to meet the RDA recommendations for calcium intake from diet alone.

Men do a little better (but only because we consume more food). 40% of men ages 19-50 and 80% of men over 50 fail to meet the RDA recommendations for calcium intake from diet alone.

Inadequate calcium intake over a lifetime is considered a major risk factor for osteoporosis.

Osteoporosis is serious business. It doesn’t just cause bone fractures. It can result in chronic pain, disability, long term nursing home care, and even death.

It’s no wonder that some experts have predicted that supplementation with calcium and vitamin D could save over $1 billion per year in health care cost savings. It is also why health professionals have recommended calcium supplementation for years, especially for postmenopausal women and men over 50.

However, recent headlines have claimed that calcium supplementation doesn’t really increase bone density or prevent osteoporosis (more about that later). Other headlines have suggested that calcium supplementation is actually bad for you. It may increase your risk of heart disease.

That’s why the general public, and even many doctors, are confused. Should we take calcium supplements? Everyone wants to know the answer to two questions:

Do calcium supplements work?

Are calcium supplements safe?

I will start with the second question first.

Are Calcium Supplements Safe?

I have discussed the issue of calcium supplements and heart disease risk in a previous issue of Health Tips From the Professor. Briefly, the initial studies suggesting that calcium supplementation might increase the risk of heart attacks and cardiovascular disease were good studies, but they were small, short-term studies.

The initial studies raised an important question, so the scientific community stepped up to the plate and conducted larger, longer term studies to test the hypothesis. Both of those studies concluded that calcium supplementation posed no heart health risks.

Now a third major study on the subject has just been published (Raffield et al, Nutrition, Metabolism & Cardiovascular Disease, doi: 10.1016/j.numecd.2016.07.007). The study followed 6236 men and women ages 45-84 for an average of 10.3 years. The subjects were from four different race/ethnicity groups and came from 6 different locations in the United States. More importantly, there were 208 heart attacks and 641 diagnoses of cardiovascular disease during the study, so the sample size was large enough to accurately determine the relationship between calcium supplementation and heart disease.

The results were pretty straight forward:

The authors concluded: “[This study] does not support a substantial association of calcium supplement use with negative cardiovascular outcomes.” If you would like the plain-speak version of their conclusion, they were saying that they saw no increase in either heart attacks or overall cardiovascular disease in people taking calcium supplements.

If anything, they saw a slight decrease in heart attack risk in those taking calcium supplements, but this was not statistically significant.

In summary, the weight of evidence is pretty clear. Three major studies have now come to the same conclusion: Calcium supplementation does not increase the risk of either heart attacks or cardiovascular disease.

Of course, once information has been placed on the internet, it tends to stay there for a very long time – even if subsequent studies have proven it to be wrong. So the myth that calcium supplementation increases heart attack risk will probably be with us for a while.

So, should we take calcium supplements? Let’s first investigate a little further.

Do Calcium Supplements Work?

As I mention above, recent headlines have also suggested that calcium supplementation does not increase bone density, so it is unlikely to protect against osteoporosis. I analyzed the study behind those headlines in great detail in two previous issues of Health Tips From the Professor.

In Part 1 Calcium Supplements Prevent Bone Fractures I pointed out the multiple weaknesses in the study that make it impossible to draw a meaningful conclusion from the data.

In Part 2 Preventing Osteoporosis I discussed the conclusion that the study should have come to, namely: Adequate calcium intake is absolutely essential for strong bones, but calcium intake is only one component of a bone healthy lifestyle.

The bottom line is that calcium supplementation will be of little use if:

You aren’t getting adequate amounts of vitamin D and all of the other nutrients needed for bone formation from diet and supplementation.

You aren’t getting enough exercise to stimulate bone formation.

You are consuming bone dissolving foods or taking bone dissolving drugs.

Conversely, none of the other aspects of a bone healthy lifestyle matter if you aren’t getting enough calcium from diet and supplementation.

The bottom line is that you need to get adequate calcium and have a bone healthy lifestyle to build strong bones and prevent osteoporosis, and calcium supplementation is often essential to make sure you are getting adequate calcium.

Should We Take Calcium Supplements?

Should we take calcium supplements? If you are one of the millions of Americans who aren’t meeting the RDA guidelines for calcium from diet alone, the answer is an unqualified yes. Calcium supplementation is safe, and it is cheap. Osteoporosis is preventable, and it is not a disease to be trifled with.

However, you also need to be aware that calcium supplementation alone is unlikely to be effective unless you follow a bone healthy lifestyle of diet, exercise and appropriate supplementation to make sure you are getting all of the nutrients needed for bone formation.

Of course, it is always possible to get too much of a good thing. The RDA for calcium is 1,000 – 1,200 mg/day. The suggested upper limit (UL) for calcium is 2,000 – 3,000 mg/day. I would aim closer to the RDA than the UL unless higher intakes are recommended by your health care professional.

The Bottom Line

80% of men and 90% percent of women over 50 do not get enough calcium from their diet.

Consequently, doctors have consistently recommended calcium supplementation to prevent osteoporosis, and 50% of men and 60% of women over 60 currently consume calcium supplements on a regular basis.

Some small, short term studies suggested that calcium supplementation might increase the risk of heart disease, and warnings about calcium supplementation have been widely circulated on the internet. This hypothesis has been evaluated by three larger, longer term studies that have all concluded that calcium supplementation does not increase heart disease risk.

A recent study claimed that calcium supplementation was ineffective at increasing bone density, and that report has also been widely circulated. However, there are multiple weaknesses in the study that make it impossible to draw a meaningful conclusion from the data.

If you are one of the millions of Americans who aren’t meeting the RDA guidelines for calcium from diet alone, you should consider calcium supplementation. It is safe. It is effective when combined with a bone healthy lifestyle of diet, exercise, and appropriate supplementation. Finally, it is cheap. Osteoporosis is preventable, and it is not a disease to be trifled with.

Of course, it is always possible to get too much of a good thing. The RDA for calcium is 1,000 – 1,200 mg/day. The suggested upper limit (UL) for calcium is 2,000 – 3,000 mg/day. I would aim closer to the RDA than the UL unless higher intakes are recommended by your health care professional.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

Side Stitch Pain Relief

September 20, 2016 by Dr. Steve Chaney

What Is Side Stitch Pain And How Do You Treat It?

Author: Julie Donnelly, LMT –The Pain Relief Expert

Editor: Dr. Steve Chaney

Side stitch pain feels like a pin is being pushed into the muscle between your ribs – and it hurts! In fact, it’s enough to make you stop running if you’re out exercising. Or you’ll take very shallow breaths if you are suddenly attacked by a side stitch pain.

What Causes Side Stitch Pain?

The most common cause of side stitch pain is a spasm in your intercostal muscles , the tiny muscles that attach your ribs together.

When you take a breath in, your external intercostal muscles contract to make your rib cage expand, and your internal intercostal muscles contract so you can draw your ribs together and force the air out of your lungs. This is a smooth movement until you add something like heavy coughing or rapid, deep breathing.

If, for example, you are having an allergic reaction to leaves molding in the fall or you have bronchitis or a post-nasal drip, you may have bouts of uncontrolled coughing.

Or, if you are an athlete, you may be panting after a challenging workout or run.

In both cases you are rapidly opening and closing your rib cage as your body quickly draws in more air into your lungs. This rapid and repetitive movement can cause a spasm to form in your intercostal muscles. The spasm, a tiny knot in the muscle fibers, prevents those fibers from expanding as you try to draw in your breath. And you feel the muscle tension as a side stitch pain.

Treatment For Side Stitch Pain

Relief from side stitch pain is as simple as 1,2,3. Best of all, it gives immediate pain relief so you can get on with your activities.

Step 1: Using your fingertips, press directly into the side stitch pain point. Use your opposite hand to add strength to your movement.

Step 2: Hold the point for 30 seconds and then take a slow, deep, breath so your rib cage expands fully.

Step 3: Repeat this 2-3 times.

This simple treatment stops side stitch pain as soon as it happens so you can get back to breathing easily again. It’s easy to self-treat when you have just a little direction of where to go to find the pain, and how to do a self-treatment.

You can discover how to eliminate pain quickly using my book, Treat Yourself to Pain-Free Living. This book is a “how to guide” to the body, and will save you time and money, and most importantly, give you relief!

Wishing you well,

Julie Donnelly

About The Author

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

Are Some Omega-3 Fish Oil Supplements Better Than Others?

September 13, 2016 by Dr. Steve Chaney

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

The ethyl ester form of omega-3 fatty acids from fish oil has been the industry standard for high purity omega-3 fish oil supplements for many years. It is very stable, easily purified, and well absorbed by the body. What’s not to like?

If you believe some recent advertisements, there is a lot not to like about the ethyl ester form of omega-3s. These ads each claim that their particular form of omega-3s is more natural, better absorbed, and more efficiently incorporated into cell membranes, or some combination of those features. They each cite clinical studies “proving” that their products are superior. These advertisements seem so plausible and so compelling.

However, most of these advertisements come from relatively new companies that are trying to make a name for themselves in a very profitable and competitive product niche. Are the advertisements true, or is it all just smoke and mirrors? Most of these advertisements rate at least one Pinocchio.

However, it is almost impossible to tell you why I consider these advertisements omega-3 fish oil supplements to be misleading without getting a little “techie”, so let’s start with some basic definitions. I call this section “Omega-3s 101.”

Omega-3s 101

Let’s start with some basic definitions:

Free fatty acids (FFA) are long chain hydrocarbons with a single acid group at the end. They are only slightly water soluble. They are important intermediates in metabolism, but they are almost always combined with something else in the body.
Saturated fatty acids contain no double bonds, monounsaturated fatty acids contain one double bond, and polyunsaturated fatty acids contain multiple double bonds. The number of double bonds primarily affects whether they are liquids (polyunsaturated) or solids (saturated) at room temperature.
There are two classes of polyunsaturated fatty acids that are essential because the body cannot make them. Those with a double bond 3 carbons from the end are called omega-3s(If you think about the Greek alphabet, omega is at the end). Those with a double bond 6 carbons from the end are called omega-6s.
When 3 fatty acids are combined with a single molecule of glycerol they form very water insoluble compounds commonly referred to as fats or triglycerides. The proper chemical name is triacylglycerol, which is abbreviated TAG.
If one of the fatty acids on the glycerol chain is replaced by a compound containing phosphate and other charged residues, the resulting complex is called a phospholipid (PL). Because these compounds have a hydrocarbon surface that is attracted to fats and a highly charged surface that is attracted to water, they are good at emulsifying fats and are an important part of membrane structure. One phospholipid that is a major component of membranes is called phosphatidylcholine (PC), also known as lecithin.

Next, let’s look at how omega-3 fatty acids are metabolized:

The omega-3s in fish oil are primarily in the form of triglycerides, with small amounts of phospholipids. The omega-3s in most omega-3 supplements are in the form of ethyl esters for the reasons stated above.
Before the omega-3s leave the intestine they are hydrolyzed to free fatty acids.
In the cells that line the intestine the omega-3s are reconverted back into triglycerides and phospholipids and incorporated into special lipid-protein complexes for transport through the blood.
Once these lipid-protein complexes reach our cells, their contents are delivered to the cell where they can be stored as fat (TAG), used for energy (FFA), or incorporated into membranes (PL). It is primarily the omega-3s incorporated in cellular membranes that are thought to be responsible for the beneficial effects of omega-3s.

Finally, we should ask how one measures the bioavailability of the various forms of omega-3s:

While there are some nuances that I did not cover, the basic mechanisms of absorption and metabolism of omega-3s are remarkably similar regardless of whether they start out in the ethyl ester, triglyceride, phospholipid, or free fatty acid form. The questions then become, how does one test how efficiently the various forms are utilized by the body and how much do these individual test actually tell us?

When we look at what happens in the bloodstream, we need to be aware that we are looking at a combination of two effects – how rapidly the substance enters the bloodstream and how rapidly it leaves from the bloodstream. There are three important parameters we can measure when looking at delivery of omega-3s to the bloodstream:
- The maximum concentration achieved (Cmax)
- How rapidly that maximum concentration was achieved (Tmax)
- The total amount in the bloodstream over time (AUC)
When you look at some of the ads touting specialized forms of omega-3s, they are usually based on studies looking at either the maximum levels of omega-3s in the bloodstream (Cmax) or how rapidly those maximum levels were achieved (Tmax). (One suspects the ads may have selectively featured whichever parameter made their product look best). However, the parameter that really matters is the total concentration of omega-3s achieved over time (AUC).
Finally, the most important question is how much of the omega-3 is actually incorporated into cellular membranes. Once again, there is more than one parameter that can be measured.
One can measure the level of omega-3s found in cellular membranes in a short term study (a few hours) or in a long term study following many weeks of supplementation.
The short term studies only measure the rate of incorporation. The long term studies measure the steady state levels attained over time, which is a much more relevant measure.
Once again, the ads touting specialized products are usually based on short term studies which are really measuring an initial rate of incorporation of omega-3s into cellular membranes, not on long term studies that measure the steady state level of omega-3s achieved over time.

Are Some Omega-3 Fish Oil Supplements Better Than Others?

There has been a lot of confusion in the literature about whether the form of omega-3 supplements matters. Various studies have been published supporting the superiority of one form or another of omega-3s. Most of these studies have been supported by manufacturers who have a particular form of omega-3s they want to sell, and, as I mentioned above, the parameters tested seem to have been selected to make their supplement look good. So, are some omega-3 fish oil supplements better than others?

Finally, someone has designed a comprehensive study to clear up all the confusion and provide answers that can be trusted (West et al, British Journal of Nutrition, 116: 788-797, 2016). Interestingly, this research was supported by a pharmaceutical company (Vifor Pharma) that does not appear to sell an omega-3 product currently. Perhaps they simply wanted to find out what worked best before designing their own product. What a novel concept!

The authors tested 4 different forms of omega-3 fish oil supplements:

Unmodified fish oil containing the omega-3s primarily in triglyceride form (uTAG).
An omega-3 supplement in which the omega-3s in the fish oil had been hydrolyzed to free fatty acids (FFA).
An omega-3 supplement in which the omega-3s in the fish oil had been hydrolyzed to free fatty acids and converted back to triglycerides (TAG)
An omega-3 supplement in which the omega-3s in the fish oil had been hydrolyzed to free fatty acids and converted to ethyl esters (EE)

All 4 supplements contained 1.1 grams of EPA and 0.37 grams of DHA.

The authors conducted two studies:

One was a cross-over study where healthy men consumed each of the supplements in random order on different days with 14 days between tests. Blood samples were collected over the next 6 hours and levels of EPA and DHA in the blood and cellular membranes was determined.
The other was a long term study in which a randomized group of healthy men and women consumed one of the supplements for 12-weeks and incorporation of the EPA and DHA into cellular membranes was measured.

The results were pretty clear cut:

In the short term study there were no significant differences between the various supplements in the rate of uptake, maximum concentration achieved, or the total concentration over time when uptake of omega-3s into plasma triglycerides and phospholipids was measured.
The ethyl ester form was less efficiently incorporated into plasma free fatty acids than the other forms as reported in some previous studies, but this is perhaps the least important parameter measured, and there was large variability from subject to subject.
In the long term study, no significant differences were seen between the various supplements in omega-3 incorporation into cellular membranes.

The authors concluded: “Together, these findings show that in healthy individuals neither the lipid structure nor the overall fatty acid composition of supplements influence their bioavailability during dietary supplementation, despite the apparent lower postprandial availability [in short term studies] of EPA + DHA ethyl esters compared with triglycerides or free fatty acids.”

What Do These Studies Mean For You?

You can forget all those ads hyping the newest, greatest form of omega-3 fish oil supplements. Objective research has shown there is not a dimes worth of difference between the various forms of omega-3 supplements.

A far more important question is the purity of the omega-3 supplement you are using. Purity of omega-3 supplements is a huge issue. You need to remember that the EPA + DHA supplements you purchase come from polluted fish. Unfortunately, many manufacturers have inadequate purification and quality control standards. In other words, neither you nor they know whether their omega-3 products are pure. You need to make sure that the omega-3 supplement you purchase is made by a manufacturer with stringent quality control standards.

Sustainability is also an issue, so you should choose manufacturers who source their omega-3s in a sustainable manner. There are two comments I will make about sustainability so you won’t be misled.

Krill oil is marketed as a more sustainable source of omega-3s. Krill reserves are quite large, but they are not infinite. Krill is also the very foundation of the food chain that supports a large percentage of our ocean’s fish. We need to be very cautious about depleting our krill reserves.
Omega-3s derived from algae are also marketed as a more sustainable source of omega-3s. Algae-derived omega-3s have purity issues of their own, but may become an important source of omega-3s once those issues have been resolved.

The Bottom Line

The ethyl ester form of omega-3 fatty acids from fish oil has been the industry standard for high purity fish oil supplements for many years. It is very stable, easily purified, and well absorbed by the body.
However, in recent years, some manufacturers have been claiming that their omega-3 fish oil supplements were better utilized by the body because their supplements contained the omega-3s in triglyceride or free fatty acid forms.
Unfortunately, the clinical studies supporting those claims have been supported by the manufacturers making the products. There is reason to suspect that the data has been “cherry picked” to support the conclusions that support the manufacturer’s claims.
Finally, an independent and comprehensive study has compared the various forms of omega-3 fatty acids. It found that neither the lipid structure nor the overall fatty acid composition of omega-3 supplements influenced their bioavailability during long term dietary supplementation.
A far more important question is the purity of the omega-3 supplement you are using. Purity of omega-3 supplements is a huge issue. You need to remember that the EPA + DHA supplements you purchase come from polluted fish. Unfortunately, many manufacturers have inadequate purification and quality control standards. In other words, neither you nor they know whether their omega-3 products are pure. You need to make sure that the omega-3 supplement you purchase is made by a manufacturer with stringent quality control standards.

Are There Diets to Fight Depression In Women

September 6, 2016 by Dr. Steve Chaney

A Story of 6 Blind Men And An Elephant

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

Are there diets to fight depression in women? This week’s health tip reminds me of the story of 6 blind men and an elephant. You probably remember the story. One blind man grabbed a leg and declared that an elephant is like a tree trunk. Another blind man grabbed the tail and declared that an elephant was like a rope – and so it went. Each blind man had a different version of reality, but none of them really knew what an elephant was like.

Sometimes science is like that. Every scientific study is designed to test a specific hypothesis, and sometimes we scientists can become limited by the hypothesis we are testing. We only see what we are looking for. We become like the blind men trying to figure out what an elephant really is.

That thought came to mind recently when one study claimed that an anti-inflammatory diet decreased the risk of depression by 26% in women, and another claimed that increased flavonoid intake was the secret to decreasing depression in women. Of course, both of those reports came on the heels of another study a few months ago claiming that a Mediterranean diet was the secret to decreasing depression.

If all of this sounds confusing, keep that image of the blind men and the elephant in your mind for a while. I’m going to come back to the elephant later, but let me start by evaluating the merits of the two most recent studies which claim there are diets to fight depression in women.

How Were These Studies Designed?

The first study (Shivappa et al, British Journal of Nutrition, doi:10.1017/S0007114516002853, 2016) was designed to test the association between the anti-inflammatory potential of their diets and the risk of depression in middle-aged Australian women. The study followed 6,438 women with an average age of 52 for 12 years.

Self-administered surveys were sent to the participants every 2-3 years (most participants completed 5 surveys during the study). A Dietary Inflammation Index (DII) was calculated based on the food frequency portion of the surveys. Depression scores were calculated based on their answers to 10 questions from a well established depression rating system.

This was a well designed study and the results were fairly straight forward. Those women consuming the most anti-inflammatory diets were 26% less likely to develop depression than the women consuming the most pro-inflammatory diets.

The second study (Chang et al, American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, doi: 10.3945/ajcn.115.124545, 2016) was designed to test the association between flavonoid intake and depression in middle aged and older American women. This study followed 82,643 women ages 36-80 for an average of 10 years.

Flavonoid intake was calculated based on food frequency questionnaires administered every 4 years. Depression was assessed based on several well established ratings systems.

Again, this was a very well designed study, and the results were quite impressive:

Women who consumed the largest amounts of flavonoids were 7-10% less likely to develop depression than women consuming the least flavonoids.

When the study was broken down into flavonoid-containing foods, citrus fruits appeared to be particularly beneficial. Women consuming >2 servings per week were 18% less likely to develop depression than women consuming <1 serving per week.

Tea also scored high in their analysis. Women consuming >4 cups per day were 12% less likely to develop depression than women who rarely or never consumed tea.

While those flavonoid-rich foods stood out, the authors emphasized that there were no “magic” foods. It was a composite of all flavonoid containing foods that was related to lower depression risk.

The effect of a flavonoid-rich diet was particularly beneficial for older women. For women aged 65 or older at the beginning of the study, high flavonoid intake was associated with a 17% lower risk of developing depression.

Diets to Fight Depression: The Secret

I have just described two very well designed studies on diets to fight depression in women. One concluded that an anti-inflammatory diet reduced the risk of depression while the other concluded that diets rich in flavonoids decreased the risk of depression. I have previously described studies suggesting that omega-3 fatty acids decrease depression risk in women and that consuming junk food increases depression risk . Other studies have suggested that a Mediterranean diet may significantly reduce depression.

If you are looking for a natural solution to recurring depression, these individual reports are probably confusing and overwhelming. I call it the “study du jour” syndrome. It can lead to paralysis. You just don’t know what you should try first.

What if these individual studies were like the blind men trying to describe an elephant? Perhaps we need to step back and see if we can find the commonality in all of these studies. We need to look for the elephant.

For example, we might start by asking what is an anti-inflammatory diet? It turns out that diets rich in fruits, vegetables, fatty fish, olive oil and legumes are anti-inflammatory, while diets rich in saturated fats, cholesterol, and refined carbohydrates are pro-inflammatory. In short, the anti-inflammatory diet is very similar to the Mediterranean diet, and fully consistent with the reported benefits of omega-3 fatty acids. The pro-inflammatory diet, on the other hand, perfectly describes a junk food diet loaded with fat, cholesterol, and simple sugars and are not diets to fight depression.

What about diets rich in flavonoids? What are those flavonoid-rich foods? It turns out that flavonoids are found primarily in plant foods, and fruits, vegetables, and whole grains. Beverages such as tea and coffee are particularly good sources.

So the secret is that there is no secret. Your mom was right all along. Eat your fruits, vegetables and whole grains. Take your fish oil. Take a vitamin supplement to make sure you didn’t miss anything. Avoid the junk foods. You’ll be healthier, and you’ll be happier. Include these in your diets to fight depression.

What Do These Studies Mean For You?

When considered individually these studies may seem confusing. However, when you consider them altogether the evidence is overwhelming. A good diet can significantly reduce your risk of depression, and a bad diet can make your depression even worse.

Of course, diet alone will not be enough to prevent depression in everyone. A more holistic approach would be to include exercise, socialization, and some stress reduction practices. Whether stress reduction occurs through yoga, meditation, counseling or other practices will vary from individual to individual.

Of course, if your depression is severe, professional help may be needed. I regard anti-depressant medications as a very last resort, but they can be life savers for some people.

So, with the inclusion of the right foods, the above studies seem to show there are diets to fight depression in women.

The Bottom Line

Two very good studies have recently been published concerning diet and depression in women:

One study concluded that an anti-inflammatory diet reduced the risk of depression in women.

Another study concluded that a diet rich in flavonoids reduced the risk of depression in women.

Other recent studies have concluded that diets rich in omega-3s and Mediterranean diets decrease depression risk in women. Another study concluded that consuming junk foods significantly increased depression risk.

When considered individually these studies may seem confusing. However, when you consider them altogether the evidence is overwhelming. A good diet can significantly reduce your risk of depression, and a bad diet can make your depression even worse.

Your mom was right all along. Eat your fruits, vegetables and whole grains. Take your fish oil. Take a vitamin supplement to make sure you didn’t miss anything. Avoid the junk foods. You’ll be healthier, and you’ll be happier

Of course, diet alone will not be enough to prevent depression in everyone. A more holistic approach would be to include exercise, socialization, and some stress reduction practices. If your depression is severe, professional help may be needed. I regard anti-depressant medications as a very last resort, but they can be life savers for some people.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

Personalized Nutrition To Change Your Life?

August 31, 2016August 30, 2016 by Dr. Steve Chaney

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

Can a personalize nutrition assessment provide you with information to assist your health strategy? We’ve been told that genetic testing is the wave of the future. We’ve been promised that genetic testing will tell us which diseases we are most likely to develop. Of course, the unspoken assumption is that if we knew which diseases were most likely to kill us, we’d be highly motivated to make the diet and lifestyle changes needed to reduce the risk of that disease.

But what if a personalized nutrition assessment based on a simple online diet survey was just as effective at getting us to make better food choices as all those fancy genetic tests? That is just what a recent study suggests.

How Was The Study Designed?

The study was based on a simple online diet survey called Food4Me developed by University College Dublin and Crème Software Ltd. The Food4Me diet survey asks people how many times per week or per day they eat basic food groups and develops personalized diet recommendations based on what they are actually eating. It is a very simple, user friendly, survey requiring only 5-10 minutes to complete. Consumer satisfaction with this kind of survey is high. For example:

92% of participants said that “the Food4Me website was easy to use.”
76% of participants were “satisfied with the detail of information they received in their personalized nutrition report.”
80% of participants felt that “the dietary advice in the report was relevant to them.”

In spite of its simplicity and ease of use, the Food4Me survey is also quite robust. Previous studies have shown that the reproducibility and validity of the Food4Me diet survey compares very favorably with much more extensive dietary analyses (For example, R. Fallaize, et al., Journal of Medical Internet Research, 16: e190, 2014).

This study (International Journal of Epidemiology, 2016, 1-11, doi:110.093/ije/dyw186) measured the effectiveness of the Food4Me personalized nutrition reports at improving health-related behaviors. It was a 6-month randomized control study of 1269 adults from 7 European countries. It compared 4 different interventions on health-related behavior changes. The 4 interventions were:

standardized dietary advice
personalized nutrition advice based on the Food4Me survey
personalized nutrition advice based on the Food4Me survey plus BMI and blood biomarkers
personalized nutrition advice based on all that plus genetic testing

Is Personalized Nutrition The Wave Of The Future?

The results of the study were quite striking:

Compared to the group who just received standardized diet advice, the groups who received personalized nutrition advice were significantly more successful at improving health related behaviors. In particular, the groups receiving personalized nutrition advice:
- Consumed less red meat.
- Consumed less saturated fat
- Consumed less salt
- Got more folate from their diet
- Had an improved “Healthy Eating Index” (a measure of overall diet quality)

Adding information on blood biomarkers (cholesterol, carotenoids, omega-3s, and vitamin D) and genotype received did not enhance the effectiveness of the personalized nutrition recommendations at changing health behaviors.

What Does This Study Mean For You?

This is a single study, but it does suggest several interesting take-home lessons.

#1: We are much more likely to follow diet advice that is personalized to us than we are to follow standardized diet advice. This should come as no surprise. We’ve had generalized diet advice like the USDA Food Guide Pyramid and, more recently, the USDA My Plate guidelines for decades, and they haven’t moved the needle. Maybe people think of generalized guidelines as applying to other people and personalized guidelines as applying to them. Personalized nutrition seems to be more effective.

#2: This was personalized diet advice, not weird diet advice. The participants were not being told to eat as much fat as they wanted. They weren’t being told that avoiding wheat will make them slimmer and smarter. They weren’t being told to eat like a caveman. They were being given USDA-approved diet recommendations. The only difference was that the dietary recommendations were personalized to them. For example, they were only being told to eat more fruits and vegetables if, in fact, fruits and vegetables were not a regular part of their daily diet.

#3: Blood biomarkers did not provide any additional incentive to increase health related behaviors. I wouldn’t read too much into this observation. With the exception of cholesterol, the blood biomarkers selected for this study merely reinforced the diet analysis. For example, you could ask whether low blood carotenoid levels really provided any additional incentive to change their diet for an individual who was already told their intake of fruits and vegetables was low. If the study had measured disease-related blood biomarkers, it might have found that they provided additional incentive for individuals to make positive diet changes.

#4: Genetic testing did not provide any additional incentive to increase health related behaviors. This probably simply reflects the state of the science. Current genetic tests are only weakly predictive of major diseases like heart disease, diabetes, and cancer so they provide little incentive to make major lifestyle changes. This may change in the future as we improve our understanding of genetic influences on disease risks.

Missed Opportunities

This study clearly showed that a simple online diet survey like the Food4Me personalized diet assessment is very useful for changing health-related dietary behavior. However, this study also missed several opportunities to create an even more valuable tool for improving health-related behaviors. For example, the study collected data on obesity and activity levels, but did not attempt to provide personalized lifestyle recommendations based on that data. In addition, 44% of the participants reported that they had a disease, but no attempt was made to include health goals in the personalized diet and lifestyle recommendations.

The Bottom Line

A recent study showed that personalized nutrition recommendations based on a simple online survey were much more effective than standardized dietary advice at getting people to improve health-related eating habits.

Adding information on blood biomarkers and genetic tests did not enhance the effectiveness of the personalized nutrition recommendations at changing health behaviors.

The study did not evaluate the value of adding activity levels and health goals to the assessment. That perhaps represented a missed opportunity to create an even more powerful tool for positively influencing health-related behaviors.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

Deceptive Food Labels

August 23, 2016 by Dr. Steve Chaney

What The Food And Supplement Industries Don’t Want You To Know

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

Healthy Eating Is In. We are told we need more fiber, whole grains, fruits & vegetables, nuts and omega-3s in our diet. We are being told that we should be eating “super foods” we’ve never heard of because of their amazing health benefits. As a consequence, more and more Americans are reading labels to be sure that the foods and supplements they are buying are healthy. We trust the FDA and others not to allow us to be had by deceptive food labels.

But what if those food labels were deceptive? What if the food labels were more about marketing than about real health benefits? Is it possible that BIG FOOD Inc. and the supplement industry could actually be lying to us? Could it be that the manufacturers care more about their profits than about our health?

Deceptive Food Labels?

Vegetable & Fruit Follies In The Supermarket

Everyone knows that fruits and vegetables are good for us. They are chock-full of vitamins, minerals, and phytonutrients as well as fiber. But who wants to spend the time peeling an orange or washing the pesticides off that broccoli? It’s much more fun to get our fruits and vegetables from chips, pasta, and breakfast cereals.

Food manufacturers are only too happy to oblige. The chemical companies make a variety of fruit and vegetable powders that food manufacturers can add to their products. For example, Powder Pure tells food manufacturers “Whether you want to add nutrition to your label, infuse full color, or formulate a specific flavor profile for your discerning consumers, Powder Pure has the right powder to enhance your presence in the marketplace.” You will notice they are talking about adding nutrition to the label, not to the food. They are talking about “enhancing your presence in the marketplace,” not making your food healthier.

The problem is that sprinkling a little fruit and vegetable powder into a processed food will never provide the full range of nutrients that those fruits and vegetables would have provided.

Most manufacturers can’t (or won’t) specify the amounts of nutrients and phytonutrients you get from the fruit & vegetable powders they add to their processed foods, but that doesn’t stop them from making label claims like “We pop a flavorful blend of nine veggies…[in our chips]” or there is “half serving of vegetables in a 2 oz serving…[of our pasta].” Is this using deceptive food labels?

The Fruits & Vegetables in a Capsule Con

One of my pet peeves is the food supplement manufacturers who try to tell you that they have concentrated a cornucopia of fresh fruits and vegetables in a capsule. For example, one company claims that their capsules contain apple, barley, broccoli, beet, cabbage, carrot, cranberry, date, garlic, kale, oats, orange, parsley, peach, pineapple, prunes, spinach, plant enzymes, fiber, and acidophilus. All this in one capsule! Does that sound like the use of deceptive food labels?

While this list sounds impressive, you need to ask whether they are providing meaningful amounts of those fruits and vegetables. For example, the product claims to have oats. A serving of oats is equal to 1/3 cup dry oats and weighs about 28 grams. A capsule typically weighs about 0. 5 grams. Therefore, to get the equivalent of one serving of oats from a capsule, you would have to consume 56 capsules! And that’s assuming that the entire capsule was filled with oats.

Broccoli is another claimed ingredient. A serving of fresh broccoli weighs 88 grams, but roughly 80 grams of that is water. So if you dehydrated the broccoli you would be left with about 8 grams of material. Therefore, to get a single serving of dehydrated broccoli you would have to consume 16 capsules. Again, that’s assuming that the capsules were completely filled with just broccoli.

You can do this kind of calculation with each ingredient they claim is in their capsules. But when you add up the number of capsules needed to get a reasonable amount of each of these ingredients, the capsule total is staggering.

As for essential nutrients, when you read the labels on some of these products you discover that their capsules only contain small amounts of a few essential nutrients. They simply do not provide significant amounts of the vitamins, minerals, and phytonutrients you would have been getting if you ate the real foods.

On the other hand, if the label does list significant amounts of the essential nutrients, that’s usually because purified vitamins and minerals have been added to the final product. Those products are no different from any other multivitamin supplement except that they contain insignificant quantities of fruit and vegetable powders that provide no additional health benefits. Once again, it’s all about using deceptive food labels marketing, not your good health.

Faux Protein Supplements

The same deceptive marketing practices have also entered the lucrative protein supplement marketplace. You are being told about protein products that are full of fruits & vegetables, super foods and herbs. It all sounds wonderful, but once again it is all smoke and mirrors. These companies are just mixing a little fruit and vegetable powders in with their protein powder.

You are being told that these products contain dozens of fruits and vegetables that provide vitamins and antioxidants in their natural form. However, when you read the label it is obvious that many of the vitamins and minerals in that product never saw a fruit or vegetable. They were synthesized in a chemical laboratory and added to the final product along with the fruit and vegetable powders.

You are being told that these products contain super foods that provide important phytonutrients, but none of those phytonutrients is present in sufficient quantities to be featured on the nutrition label. You are told that these products contain herbal ingredients with amazing healing powers, but none of the active ingredients of the claimed herbs are present in high enough quantities to be included on the nutrition label.

Once again, it is all about marketing. Manufacturers are adding fruit and vegetable powders and a pinch of herbal ingredients to their protein powders so that they can make marketing claims, but those fruit and vegetable powders and herbal ingredients aren’t present in large enough quantities to make any significant impact on your health.

Allowed Label Claims

Many of you have asked me about companies that claim their supplement has the amount of vitamin C found in 7 oranges or the amount of folic acid found in 4 cups of cooked green peas. Those are allowed claims and are generally accurate. Just don’t assume that the vitamin C actually came from 7 oranges (it didn’t) or that their supplement has all the nutrients found in 7 oranges (it doesn’t). Again, these companies find ways to use deceptive food labels to make sales.

The Bottom Line

We are being told that we should read labels to make sure that the foods and supplements we buy are good for us. We are also being told that we should be eating more fruits and vegetables. Food manufacturers know an emerging trend when they see one, so many of them are adding fruit and vegetable powders to the foods and supplements they manufacture. This increases the marketing appeal of their products, but does nothing to make their products healthier. It is label deception, pure and simple.

If you want to avoid being deceived by deceptive food labels, you should:

Ignore the label claims of fruits and vegetables added to the processed foods you see in the market. The fruit and vegetable powders added to those foods provide no proven benefit. The best place to get your fruits and vegetables is to [surprise] eat your fruits and vegetables.

Leave those supplements claiming to have concentrated lots of fruits and vegetables into a single capsule on the shelf. Those claims are grossly deceptive because the capsules do not contain significant amounts of the fruits and vegetables listed on the label. They do not provide the nutrients you would have gotten if you had eaten the real foods. Once again, the best way to get the fruits and vegetables you need in your diet is to actually eat fresh fruits and vegetables.

Forget those protein supplements that make amazing claims based on all the fruits, vegetables, super foods, and herbal ingredients they have. Once again, the fruit and vegetable powders and herbal ingredients in these products are not present in sufficient quantities to provide any significant health benefits. It is the marketing that is amazing, not the health benefits.

Finally, many of you have asked me about companies that claim their supplement has the amount of vitamin C found in 7 oranges or the amount of folic acid found in 4 cups of cooked green peas. Those are allowed claims and are generally accurate. Just don’t assume that the vitamin C actually came from 7 oranges (it didn’t) or that their supplement has all the nutrients found in 7 oranges (it doesn’t).

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

Treatment for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome

August 16, 2016 by Dr. Steve Chaney

What Causes Carpal Tunnel Syndrome – Part 2

Author: Julie Donnelly, LMT –The Pain Relief Expert

Editor: Dr. Steve Chaney

This month we will discuss treatment for carpal tunnel syndrome. However, let’s recap a little.

In last month’s article “What Causes Carpal Tunnel Syndrome” – Part 1 I shared how carpal tunnel syndrome almost destroyed my career as a massage therapist. I also shared that I rejected surgery and drew on all of my knowledge to devise a self-treatment program that cured my carpal tunnel syndrome symptoms.

Last month, I discussed the muscles and nerves in your neck, chest, and upper arm, and how they impinge on the median nerve and refer burning and tingling into your wrist and hand. This month the muscles we are discussing not only will cause burning and tingling, but will also cause pain in your wrist and hand. Plus, these muscles will put a strain on your carpal tunnel and will impinge on the nerve as it travels through your carpal tunnel. Fortunately, a simple treatment will release the tight muscles and take the pressure off the nerve.

I found the solution to my problem, and I’ve been bringing it to people worldwide ever since.

Treatment for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: Forearm and Hand

The muscles on the top of your arm (B) are called the Extensors.

Your extensors originate at your elbow and insert into the carpal bones (back of your hand) and into your fingertips.

Your Flexor muscles (A) are on the underside of your forearm.

The flexors also originate at your elbow, they come down your forearm and merge into the tendon at your wrist. The tendons then go through your carpal tunnel and then insert into your hand and fingers.

When your hand is flat on a table and your extensors start to contract, you lift up your hand (B). But you can see that the flexors (A) on the underside of your forearm will need to lengthen to allow this movement.

When your flexors are tight (commonly from repetitive movements), they won’t lengthen to allow your extensors to pick up your hand, and the taut flexor tendons may trap your median nerve in your carpal tunnel. This is a major cause of carpal tunnel syndrome because the nerve is being trapped right in the carpal tunnel. It was one of the primary keys to my symptoms, and an important part of the treatment for carpal tunnel syndrome.

Why Muscle Tendons Cause Numbness In Your Fingers

As you look at this graphic you’ll see the flexor tendons surrounding the median nerve as they all pass through the carpal tunnel. Also, notice the carpal bones, which are where the extensor muscles attach. Finally, look at the thumb muscle called Opponens Pollicis . This muscle originates on the bridge to the carpal tunnel (called the Flexor Retinaculum), and when the muscle contracts you bring your thumb into the center of your palm.

The flexor retinaculum is the ligament that is severed during carpal tunnel release surgery. As you look at how close the median nerve is to the flexor retinaculum, you can see where a potential surgical mistake could sever the nerve. This accident disables the hand and isn’t reversible. Also, severing the flexor retinaculum means your thumb loses its base, and you lose strength.

This is the reason I refused surgery and sought a different carpal tunnel treatment.

As I studied each muscle and saw how they each impacted the median nerve, I realized that if I released the spasms in each muscle that it would take the pressure off the nerve. And, sure enough, that’s exactly what happened!

It took me about 90 minutes to figure this out (it will only take you 15 minutes to do all of the treatment for carpal tunnel syndrome to yourself), but in just that short amount of time I released ALL of the pain and numbness in my hand and wrist. I was beyond being thrilled — I saved my career!

Eventually I figured out how to put this entire process into my Basic Self-Treatment System DVD program to teach people all over the world how to eliminate the symptoms of carpal tunnel syndrome. I even developed a specialized tool to help people get the correct pressure and focus for each spasm.

A Simple Treatment for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome For Your Thumb

(Pictures and description are excerpts from The Julstro System for Hand/Wrist Pain and Numbness in my Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Book)

To release the spasms in your thumb muscle, place your opposite elbow into the thick portion of your thumb as shown in the picture to the left.

Step 2:

Use your fingertips to guide your elbow along the muscle. Move your elbow in a line from the center of your wrist to the base of your thumb.

Use sufficient pressure to really feel the muscle and the tender points which are spasms in the muscle fibers.

When you find a spasm, hold the pressure for 30 seconds and then deeply move back and forth a little bit.

If you are experiencing hand/wrist pain or numbness, before you make the decision to go for surgery it is worthwhile to read everything you can about muscles, numb fingers, and carpal tunnel pain relief in my Carpal Tunnel Syndrome book. You can’t undo surgery! So, try the treatment for carpal tunnel syndrome demonstrated here.

Wishing you well,

Julie Donnelly

About The Author

Julie Donnelly is a Deep Muscle Massage Therapist with 20 years of experience specializing in the treatment of chronic joint pain and

sports injuries. She has worked extensively with elite athletes and patients who have been unsuccessful at finding relief through the more conventional therapies.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.