Dr. Steve Chaney

Is Diet Soda Bad For You?

by

Do Diet Sodas Increase Your Risk Of Stroke?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

diet soda badIs diet soda bad for you?  With over two third of Americans overweight or obese, it is clear that we are in a midst of an obesity epidemic. Multiple studies have shown that over consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (soft drinks, energy drinks, and “fruit” juices that aren’t made from real fruit) are major drivers of the obesity epidemic. Because of these trends, many experts recommend substituting artificially sweetened beverages for sugar-sweetened beverages in the American diet.

Is that advice sound? Do diet sodas help prevent weight gain? Are they safe? The answers to those questions are not as clear as you might expect.

Do Diet Sodas Prevent Weight Gain?

diet soda make you fatThe answer to that question would seem to be a no-brainer. Substituting beverages with no calories for beverages with calories should lead to less weight gain. However, as I summarized in a previous “Health Tips From the Professor” article Do Diet Sodas Make You Fat, the answer is not clear at all. Some studies suggest that diet sodas help people lose weight. Other studies suggest diet sodas cause just as much weight gain as sugar-sweetened sodas.

With so much confusion in the literature, what should we believe? More importantly, what do the experts say? This January an international consortium of experts reviewed all of the pertinent literature and published a position paper on whether artificially sweetened beverages were of value in responding to the global obesity crisis (Borges et al, PLOS Medicine, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002195).

These authors concluded:

  • “In summary, the available evidence…does not consistently demonstrate that artificially-sweetened beverages are effective for weight loss or preventing metabolic abnormalities [pre-diabetes and diabetes]. Evidence on the impact of artificially-sweetened beverages on child health is even more limited and inconclusive than in adults.”
  • “The absence of evidence to support the role of artificially sweetened beverages in preventing weight gain and the lack of studies on their long-term effects on health strengthen the position that artificially-sweetened beverages should not be promoted as part of a healthy diet.”

Is Diet Soda Bad For You?

diet soda strokeAs if the lack of proven efficacy weren’t bad enough, other studies suggest that diet sodas may also be bad for your health. In previous issues of “Health Tips From the Professor,” I have discussed other studies showing that diet sodas are just as likely as regular sodas to increase risk of diabetes Artificial Sweeteners and Diabetes and heart disease Soft Drinks and Heart Disease.

Even worse, a study published earlier this month (Pase et al, Stroke, DOI: 10.1161/STROKE.AHA.116.016027 ) concluded that diet sodas may significantly increase the risk of stroke and Alzheimer’s disease.

This study looked at 2888 participants of the Framingham Heart Study. The participants evaluated for risk of stroke had a mean age of 62 on enrollment. Those evaluated for risk of dementia had a mean age of 69 on enrollment. All subjects were followed for 10 years. Three food frequency questionnaires were administered during that 10-year period to evaluate consumption of diet and sugar-sweetened sodas. The results of the study were:

  • People consuming at least one diet soda per day over a 10-year period were 3X more likely to have a stroke or develop dementia (primarily Alzheimer’s disease) than people consuming no diet sodas.
  • No increased risk of stroke or dementia was seen for people consuming sugar-sweetened beverages. However, that does not mean that sugar-sweetened beverages are good for you. Previous studies have shown they increase the risk of obesity and diabetes.
  • When the data were corrected for hypertension, cardiovascular disease, and obesity (waist to hip ratio), diet sodas still increased the risk of having a stroke by 2.6-fold.
  • This is not the only study to show a link between diet sodas and stroke. Two other studies have come to the same conclusion, and in both of those studies the increased risk was also seen only with diet soda consumption, not with sugar-sweetened soda consumption.

The author of the study concluded by saying: “As the consumption of artificially sweetened soft drinks is increasing in our community, along with the prevalence of stroke and dementia, future research is needed to replicate our findings and to investigate the mechanisms underlying the reported association.”

I agree. Current evidence does not definitively prove that diet sodas cause stroke and Alzheimer’s, but these are life-changing adverse health outcomes. Further research to test this association is desperately needed to know whether or not diet soda is bad for you.

Are Diet Sodas Safe and Effective?

diet soda dangerousAs you might expect these studies have caused quite a bit of controversy. Some experts have embraced these studies and have concluded that health professionals should stop recommending diet sodas as a safe and effective alternative to sugar-sweetened sodas.
Others have been unwilling to change their recommendation of diet sodas for people who are obese and/or diabetic. Their rationale is 3-fold:

  • These studies merely show that diet soda consumption is associated with weight gain, diabetes, heart disease, stroke and Alzheimer’s. Association does not prove causation, so their viewpoint is that there is no conclusive proof that diet sodas cause weight gain and health risks.
  • The obesity epidemic is a major health crisis, and consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages plays an important role in weight gain.
  • They are convinced that most people are so addicted to the sweet taste of sugar that they would be unwilling to switch to calorie free options like water or herbal teas.

In short, they are desperately clinging to the hope that substituting diet sodas for sugar-sweetened sodas will put a dent in the obesity crises because they don’t believe there are any other viable options.

What Do These Studies Mean For You?

I side with those experts who have looked at the data from the opposite perspective and concluded there is no convincing evidence that diet sodas are either safe or effective.

If the conversation were just centered around weight gain, diabetes, and heart disease, this could be considered an academic discussion. One could argue that diet sodas might have some benefit, and, at the worst, would have the same health risks as the regular sodas they replaced.

However, the possibility that diet sodas may increase the risk of stroke and dementia is a game-changer in my mind. That’s because consumption of sugar-sweetened sodas does not appear to increase the risk of either stroke or dementia. If true, that means that substitution of diet sodas for sugar-sweetened sodas is not a neutral substitution. It could cause serious harm.

With no good evidence that diet sodas help people control weight and the possibility that they may have serious health risks, it is difficult to see how anyone in good conscience can continue to recommend diet sodas in place of regular sodas.

My recommendation is to substitute water and other unsweetened beverages for the sugar sweetened beverages you are currently consuming. If you crave the fizz of sodas, drink carbonated water. If you need more taste, try herbal teas or infuse water with slices of lemon, lime, or your favorite fruit. If you buy commercial brands of flavored water, check the labels carefully. They may contain sugars or artificial sweeteners. Those you want to avoid.

So, is diet soda bad for you?  Well, it’s not good for you.

The Bottom Line

  • This January an international consortium of experts reviewed all of the pertinent literature and concluded: “The available evidence…does not consistently demonstrate that artificially-sweetened beverages are effective for weight loss or preventing metabolic abnormalities. The absence of evidence to support the role of artificially sweetened beverages in preventing weight gain and the lack of studies on other long-term effects on health strengthen the position that artificially-sweetened beverages should not be promoted as part of a healthy diet.”
  • This April a study was published reporting that people consuming at least one diet soda per day over a 10-year period were 3X more likely to have a stroke or develop dementia (primarily Alzheimer’s disease) than people consuming no diet sodas. Two other studies on the effect of diet sodas on the risk of stroke have come to similar conclusions.
  • We cannot yet say definitively that diet sodas cause stroke and dementia. Further research is clearly needed to test these associations. However, at this point it is safe to say there is no convincing evidence that diet sodas are either safe or effective.
  • With no good evidence that diet sodas help people control weight and the possibility that they may have serious health risks, it is difficult to see how anyone in good conscience can continue to recommend diet sodas as a substitute for sugar-sweetened sodas.
  • My recommendation is to substitute water and other unsweetened beverages for the sugar sweetened beverages you are currently consuming. If you crave the fizz of sodas, drink carbonated water. If you need more taste, try herbal teas or infuse water with slices of lemon, lime, or your favorite fruit. If you buy commercial brands of flavored water, check the labels carefully. They may contain sugars or artificial sweeteners. Those you want to avoid.
  • For a more nuanced discussion of this issue, read the article above.

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.

Does Soy Increase Breast Cancer Risk?

by

What Does the Latest Study Say?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

does soy increase breast cancer riskDoes soy increase breast cancer risk?

“To soy or not to soy. That is the question.” If you are a woman, particularly a woman with breast cancer, it is an important question. Some experts say soy should be avoided at all costs. They say that soy will increase your risk of breast cancer. Other experts say soy is perfectly safe and may even reduce your risk of breast cancer.

If you are a breast cancer survivor, the question of whether soy increases or decreases your risk of disease recurrence is even more crucial. You have already endured surgery, chemotherapy, and/or radiation. You never want to go through that again.

 

Why Is There So Much Confusion About Soy?

soy confusionSoy isoflavones decrease estrogen production, strengthen the immune system, inhibit cell proliferation, and reduce the production of reactive oxygen species. These are all effects that might reduce breast cancer risk.

On the other hand, soy isoflavones also bind to estrogen receptors and exhibit weak estrogenic activity. This effect has the potential to increase breast cancer risk.

Cell culture and animal studies have only confused the issue. Soy isoflavones stimulate the growth of breast cancer cells in a petri dish. Soy isoflavones also stimulate breast cancer growth in a special strain of mice lacking an immune system. However, in studies in both mice and rats with a functioning immune system, soy isoflavones decreased breast cancer risk.

The confusion has been amplified by claims and counter-claims on the internet. There are bloggers who are more interested in the spectacular than they are in accuracy (Today we call this fake news). They have taken the very weak evidence that soy isoflavones could possibly increase breast cancer risk and have blown it all out of proportion.

Their blogs claimed that soy definitely increased breast cancer risk and should be avoided at all cost. Their claims were picked up by other web sites. Eventually, the claims were repeated so many times that people started to believe them. A “myth”was created.  I call it a myth, because it was never based on convincing scientific evidence.

In the meantime, scientists looked at the cell culture and animal studies and took a more responsible approach. They said “If this is true, it is an important public health issue. We need to do clinical trials in humans to test this hypothesis.”

It is easy to see why the general public still asks “Does soy increase breast cancer risk?”

 

breast cancer soyWhat Have Previous Clinical Studies Shown?

The question “Does soy increased breast cancer risk” was settled a long time ago. Some studies have shown no effect of soy consumption on breast cancer risk. Others have reported that soy consumption decreased breast cancer risk. A meta-analysis of 18 previous clinical studies found that soy slightly decreased the risk of developing breast cancer (J Natl Cancer Inst, 98: 459-471, 2006 Meta-Analysis-of-Soy-Intake-and-Breast-Cancer-Risk). None of those studies found any evidence that soy increased the risk of breast cancer.

What about recurrence of breast cancer in women who are breast cancer survivors? Between 2006 and 2013 there have been five major clinical studies (soy-and-breast-cancer-recurrence) looking at the effects of soy consumption on breast cancer recurrence in both Chinese and American populations. Once again, the studies have shown either no effect of soy on breast cancer recurrence or a protective effect. None of them have shown any detrimental effects of soy consumption for breast cancer survivors.

A meta-analysis of all 5 studies was published in 2013 (Chi et al, Asian Pac J Cancer Prev., 14: 2407-2412, 2013). This study combined the data from 11,206 breast cancer survivors in the US and China. Those with the highest soy consumption had a 23% decrease in recurrence and a 15% decrease in mortality from breast cancer.

 

breast cancer soy studyWhat Did The Latest Study Show?

In previous clinical studies the protective effect of soy has been greater in Asian populations than in North American populations. This could have been because Asians consume more soy. However, it could be due to other population differences as well. To better evaluate the effect of soy consumption on breast cancer survivors in the North America, this group of investigators correlated soy consumption with all-cause mortality in breast cancer survivors in the US and Canada (Zhang et al, Cancer, DOI: 10.1002/cncr.30615, March 2017).

The data was collected from The Breast Cancer Family Registry, an international research infrastructure established in 1995. The women enrolled in this registry either had been recently diagnosed with breast cancer or had a family history of breast cancer.

This study included 6235 breast cancer survivors from the registry who lived in the San Francisco Bay area and the province of Ontario in Canada. The women represented an ethnically diverse population and had a median age of 51.8 at enrollment.  Soy consumption was assessed either at the time of enrollment or immediately following breast cancer diagnosis. The women were followed for 9.4 years, during which time 1224 of them died.

The results were as follows:

  • There was a 21% decrease in all-cause mortality for women who had the highest soy consumption compared to those with the lowest soy consumption.
  • The protective effect of soy was strongest for those women who had receptor negative breast cancer. This is significant because receptor-negative breast cancer is associated with poorer survival rates than hormone receptor-positive cases.
  • The protective effect was also greatest (35% reduction in all-cause mortality) for women with the highest soy consumption following breast cancer diagnosis. This suggests that soy may play an important role in breast cancer survival.
  • The authors concluded “In this large, ethnically diverse cohort of women with breast cancer, higher dietary intake of [soy] was associated with reduced total mortality.”

In an accompanying editorial, Omer Kucuk, MD, of the Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University, noted that the United States is the number 1 soy producer in the world and is in a great position to initiate changes in health policy by encouraging soy intake.  He said “We now have evidence that soy foods not only prevent breast cancer but also benefit women who have breast cancer. Therefore, we can recommend women to consume soy foods because of soy’s many health benefits.”  In light of this study, has the question “Does soy increase breast cancer risk” been answered?

 

Does Soy Increase Breast Cancer Risk?

soy breast cancer mythEvery clinical study has its limitations. If there were only one or two studies, the question of whether soy increases breast cancer risk might still be in doubt. However, multiple clinical studies have come to the same conclusion. Either soy has no effect on breast cancer risk and breast cancer recurrence, or it has a protective effect.

Not a single clinical study has found any evidence that soy increases breast cancer risk. It is clear that consumption of soy foods is safe, and may be beneficial for women with breast cancer. The myth that soy increases breast cancer risk needs to be put to rest.

On the other hand, we should not think of soy as a miracle food. Breast cancer risk is also decreased by a diet that:

  • Contains lots of fruits and vegetables.
  • Is low in processed grains & sweets and high in whole grains.
  • Is low in saturated & trans fats and high in omega-3 and monounsaturated fats.
  • Is low in red & processed meats and high in beans, fish & chicken.

Furthermore, diet is just one component of a holistic approach for reducing the risk of breast cancer. In addition to a healthy diet, the American Cancer Society recommends that you:

  • Control your weight
  • Be physically active
  • Limit alcohol
  • Don’t smoke
  • Limit hormone replacement therapy unless absolutely necessary.
  • Reduce stress

Does soy increase breast cancer risk?  No.

The Bottom Line

 

  • It is time to put the myth that soy increases breast cancer risk to rest. This myth is based on cell culture and animal studies, and those studies were inconclusive.
  • Multiple clinical studies have shown that soy either has no effect on breast cancer risk, or that it reduces the risk.
  • Multiple clinical studies have also shown that soy either has no effect on breast cancer recurrence in women who are breast cancer survivors, or that it reduces recurrence.
  • The latest clinical study is fully consistent with previous studies. It reports:
    • There was a 21% decrease in all-cause mortality for women who had the highest soy consumption compared to those with the lowest soy consumption.
    • The protective effect of soy was strongest for those women who had receptor negative breast cancer. This is significant because receptor-negative breast cancer is associated with poorer survival rates than hormone receptor-positive cases.
    • The protective effect was also greatest (35% reduction in all-cause mortality) for women with the highest soy consumption following breast cancer diagnosis. This suggests that soy may play an important role in breast cancer survival.
  • No clinical studies have provided any evidence to support the claim that soy increases either breast cancer risk or breast cancer recurrence.
  • On the other hand, we should not think of soy as a miracle food. Breast cancer risk is also decreased by a diet that:
    • Contains lots of fruits and vegetables.
    • Is low in processed grains & sweets and high in whole grains.
    • Is low in saturated & trans fats and high in omega-3 and monounsaturated fats.
    • Is low in red & processed meats and high in beans, fish & chicken
  • Furthermore, diet is just one component of a holistic approach for reducing the risk of breast cancer. In addition to a healthy diet, the American Cancer Society recommends that you:
    • Control your weight
    • Be physically active
    • Limit alcohol
    • Don’t smoke
    • Limit hormone replacement therapy unless absolutely necessary.
    • Reduce stress

 

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.

Is the Ketogenic Diet Safe?

by

Is The Ketogenic Diet Effective?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

ketogenic dietThe ketogenic diet has been around for a while. It has been used to control epilepsy in children since the 1920s. Nobody is quite sure why it helps control epilepsy, but it does. Once a mainstay of therapy, it is now primarily used as an adjunct to anti-epileptic drugs.

However, recently the ketogenic diet has gone mainstream. It’s no longer just for epilepsy. It has become the latest diet fad. If you believe the claims:

  • Hunger and food cravings will disappear. The pounds will melt away effortlessly and rapidly.
  • You will feel great. You’ll have greater mental focus and increased energy.
  • Physical endurance will increase. You’ll become superhuman.
  • Type 2 diabetes will disappear.
  • Your blood sugar, cholesterol, and triglyceride levels will improve, reducing your risk of developing diabetes and heart disease.

What’s not to like? This sounds like the perfect diet. But, are these claims true? More importantly, is this diet safe?

What Is Ketosis?

what is ketosisKetosis is a natural metabolic adaptation to starvation. To better understand that statement let me start with a little of what I’ll call metabolism 101.

Metabolism 101:

The Fed State: Here’s what happens to the carbohydrate, protein & fat we eat in a meal.

  • Most carbohydrates are converted to blood sugar (glucose), which is utilized in three ways:
    • Most tissues use glucose as their primary energy source in the fed state.
    • Excess glucose is stored as glycogen in muscle and liver.
    • Glycogen stores are limited, so much of the excess glucose is stored as fat.
  • A few tissues such as heart muscle use fat as an energy source. Excess fat is stored.
  • Protein is also used in three ways:
    • Some of it is used to replace and repair the protein components in muscle and other tissues.
    • In conjunction with exercise, protein can be used to increase muscle mass.
    • Excess protein is converted to fat and stored.

The Fasting State: Between meals:

  • Most tissues switch to fats as their primary energy source. Fat stores are utilized to fuel the cells that can use fat.
  • Brain, red blood cells, and a few other tissues still rely solely on glucose as their energy source.
    • Liver glycogen stores are broken down to keep blood glucose levels constant and provide energy for these tissues. (Muscle glycogen stores are reserved for high intensity exercise).
    • As liver glycogen stores are depleted, the body starts breaking down protein and converting it to glucose.

ketogenic diet problems and solutionsStarvation – The Problem: If the fasting state were to continue for more than a few days, we enter what is called starvation. At this point we have a serious problem. Fat stores and carbohydrate stores (liver glycogen) exist for the sole purpose of providing fuel during the fasting state. Protein, however, is unique. There are no separate protein stores in the body. All protein in our body is serving essential functions.

To make matters worse, our brain is metabolically very active. It consumes glucose at an alarming rate. Thus, large amounts of glucose are needed even in the fasting state. If protein continued to be converted to glucose at the same rate as during an overnight fast, our essential protein reserves would rapidly be depleted. Irreversible damage to heart muscle and other essential organs would occur. We would be dead in a few weeks.

Starvation – The Solution: Fortunately, at this point a miraculous adaptation occurs. Our bodies start to convert some of the fat to ketones.

  • All tissues that use fat as an energy source during fasting can also use ketones as an energy source, sometimes with greater efficiency.
  • Over a period of several days, the brain adapts to ketones as its primary energy source. This greatly reduces the depletion of cellular protein to supply blood glucose.
  • However, red blood cells and a few other cells still require glucose as an energy source. Essential protein reserves are still being depleted, but at a far slower pace.
  • With these adaptations, humans can survive months without food if necessary.

There are a few other adaptations that make sense if we think about the dilemma of going long periods without food.

  • Appetite decreases.
  • Metabolic rate decreases, which helps preserve both protein & fat stores.

 

What Is The Ketogenic Diet?

 

ketogenic diet keytonesProponents of the ketogenic diet advocate achieving a permanent state of ketosis without starving yourself. That is achievable because the real trigger for ketosis is low blood sugar, not starvation.

The starting point for the ketogenic diet is low-carb, high-fat diets like Atkins. However, ketogenic diets go beyond traditional low-carb, high-fat diets. They restrict carbohydrates even further to <10% of calories so that a permanent state of ketosis can be achieved. Basically, the ketogenic diet:

  • Eliminates grains and sugars.
  • Eliminates most fruits.
  • Eliminates starchy vegetables (root vegetables, corn, peas, beans, squash & yams).
  • Reduces protein intake. That’s because dietary protein will be converted to glucose when blood glucose levels are low.

You are left with a highly restrictive diet that allows unlimited amounts of fats & some vegetables and moderate amounts of meats, eggs, and cheeses.

The Ketogenic Diet Is Not For Wimps

ketogenic diet tough#1: You have to be committed. As noted above, this is a highly restrictive diet. You will have great difficulty following it when you eat out or are invited to a friend’s house for dinner. You will also have to give up many of your favorite foods.

#2: The transition is rough. Physiological adaptation to the ketogenic diet will take anywhere from a couple of days to a week or two. During that time, you will have to endure some of the following:

  • Headaches, confusion & “brain fog”
  • Fatigue
  • Hunger
  • Lightheadedness and shakiness
  • Leg cramps
  • Constipation
  • Bad breath
  • Heart palpitations

#3: There are no “cheat days”. On most diets, you can have occasional “cheat days” or sneak in some of your favorite foods from time to time. The ketogenic diet is different. A single “cheat day” is enough to take you out of ketosis. If you want to resume the ketogenic diet, you will need to go through the transition period once again.

Is The Ketogenic Diet Effective?

ketogenic diet effectiveWith this background in mind, let’s evaluate the claims made by proponents of the ketogenic diet. I’ll rate them on the “Pinocchio Scale”. “Zero Pinocchios” means they are mostly true. “One Pinocchio” means they are half true. “Two Pinocchios” means they are mostly false.

Zero Pinocchios (Mostly True Claims):

  • Reduced hunger. This is part of the starvation response.
  • Improved mental focus and increased energy. In part, this is simply in contrast to the “brain fog” and fatigue of the transition phase. However, you have also eliminated all foods that can cause blood sugar swings from your diet. Blood sugar swings can affect both mental focus and energy levels.
  • Rapid weight loss. If we focus on short term weight loss, this is true because:
    • A lot of the initial weight loss is water. Glycogen stores retain water. As glycogen stores are depleted, the water is lost along with them.
    • Most people inadvertently reduce their caloric intake on a highly restrictive diet like this. For example, fats are often consumed along with carbohydrate-rich foods (butter with toast, sour cream with potatoes, cream cheese with bagels). While it is easy to say that unlimited consumption of healthy fats is allowed, most people reduce their consumption of fats in the absence of their carbohydrate-rich companions.
    • Note: Proponents of the ketogenic diet will tell you that the weight loss associated with the ketogenic diet is because you are burning fat stores. You will only burn fat stores when dietary fat intake is not sufficient to meet your energy needs. In other words, you burn your fat stores when “calories in” are less than “calories out” – just as with any other diet.
  • Reversal of type 2 diabetes. Because carbohydrates are restricted in this diet, blood sugar and insulin levels will be low. If you are on medications, those will need to be adjusted by your physician.

 

One Pinocchio (Half-True Claims):

  • Improved cholesterol and triglyceride levels. The jury is out on this one. Some studies show an improvement on the ketogenic diet. Other studies show them getting worse.
  • Increased physical endurance. This is only true for low-intensity endurance exercise. It is not true for any exercise or event that requires spurts of high intensity exercise. That’s because:
    • The muscle fibers used for low intensity endurance exercise utilize ketone bodies with high efficiency. That means you can run for miles as long as you don’t care how fast you get there.
    • The muscle fibers used for high-intensity, short-duration exercise cannot adapt to use of ketone bodies because they lack sufficient mitochondria. They require glycogen stores, which are depleted on a ketogenic diet. Even in endurance events like marathons most people want to sprint to the finish line. They won’t be able to do that if they are on a ketogenic diet.

 

Two Pinocchios (Mostly False Claims):

  • ketogenic diet mythsLong term weight loss. Some long-term success has been claimed in a highly controlled clinical setting. However, most studies show:
    • People regain some or most of the weight after 6 months to a year.
    • After 1 or 2 years, there is no difference in weight loss between high-fat/low-carb diets and low-fat/high-carb diets.
    • That’s because:
      • Most people cannot stick to restrictive diets long term, and this diet is very restrictive.
      • Once you go off this diet, even for a short time, your glycogen stores will be replenished and the water weight will return along with the glycogen.
      • The reduction in metabolic rate and the reduction in muscle mass associated with the ketogenic diet make it difficult to keep the weight off long term
  • It is a healthy diet.
    • This is a healthy diet only from the point of view that it eliminates most fast foods and processed foods.
    • However, any diet that eliminates 2 and a half food groups (grains, fruits, and starchy vegetables) is setting you up for long term nutritional deficiencies. It is possible to cover some of those deficiencies with supplementation, but supplements can never provide all the nutrients found in real food.

 

Is The Ketogenic Diet Safe?

ketogenic diet safeFor most people the ketogenic diet is likely to be safe for short periods, maybe even a few months. However, I have grave concerns if the diet is continued long term.

  • I have already mentioned the likelihood this diet will create nutritional deficiencies. Long term, those deficiencies could have severe health consequences.
  • Proponents of the diet recommend that protein intake be limited so that “optimal” ketosis can be achieved. If the dieter is successful at doing that, it will result in a gradual depletion of essential cellular protein reserves as discussed above. Long term, that has the potential to weaken heart muscle, compromise the immune system, and damage essential organs.
  • Ketones can damage the kidneys. In the short term, damage is likely to be minimal as long as plenty of water is consumed. However, long term ketosis could be a significant concern for your kidneys.

I have seen proponents of the ketogenic diet shrug this off as a concern only if protein intake is excessive. They are missing the point. The problem is the ketones, not the protein.

  • Long term ketosis has the potential to cause osteoporosis. That is because the so-called “ketones” are actually organic acids except for the small amount of acetone that gives your breath a fruity smell. Organic acids must be neutralized to keep our body pH in the normal range. There are multiple mechanisms for neutralizing organic acids. One of those mechanisms involves dissolving bone and releasing calcium carbonate into the bloodstream. This slow dissolution of bone will continue for as long as someone is in ketosis.

 

Proponents of the ketogenic diet shrug this off by saying that you never get into ketoacidosis on their diet. Again, they are missing the point. Ketoacidosis simply means that the production of organic acids has become so great that all the body’s mechanisms for neutralizing those acids have become overwhelmed. Ketoacidosis occurs in uncontrolled diabetes and can be deadly. The problem is the slow dissolution of bone during long term ketosis, not a short-term crisis like ketoacidosis.

If you are considering the ketogenic diet for weight loss, my recommendations would be to:

  • Consider other equally effective, but less demanding, weight loss programs. Look for programs that help you preserve muscle mass and teach you healthy eating habits that can be sustained for a lifetime.
  • If you do decide to follow the ketogenic diet, only use it for a short period of time to jump start your weight loss. Then switch to a diet program that has been clinically proven to improve your health long term. Examples would be the Mediterranean diet and the Dash diet.

If you are choosing the ketogenic diet for health reasons, I would recommend the Mediterranean diet or Dash diet instead.

 

The Bottom Line

 

  1. The ketogenic diet is the latest diet fad. I give it a C+ compared to other popular diets.
  2. This is not a diet for wimps.
    • It is a highly restrictive diet
    • The transition period as you adjust to the diet is rough.
    • There are no “cheat days”
  3. Some of the claims made for the ketogenic diet are mostly true, some are half-true, and some are mostly false. I help you sort them out in the article above.
  4. Short term, the diet is probably safe for most people. However, long term I have several concerns.
    • The diet is likely to create nutritional deficiencies. Long term, those deficiencies could have severe health consequences.
    • The diet is likely to gradually deplete essential cellular protein reserves. Long term, that could weaken heart muscle, compromise the immune system, and damage essential organs.
    • The diet has the potential to damage the kidneys.
    • The diet has the potential to cause osteoporosis.
    • The metabolic rationale for those concerns is discussed in the article above.
  5. If you are considering the ketogenic diet for weight loss, my recommendations would be to:
    • Consider other equally effective, but less demanding, weight loss programs. Look for programs that help you preserve muscle mass and teach you healthy eating habits that can be sustained for a lifetime.
    • If you do decide to follow the ketogenic diet, only use it for a short period of time to jump start your weight loss. Then switch to a diet program that has been clinically proven to improve your health long term. Examples would be the Mediterranean diet and the Dash diet.
  6. If you are choosing the ketogenic diet for health reasons, I would recommend the Mediterranean diet or Dash diet instead.

 

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.

Shin Splint Treatment

by

Shin Pain or Shin Splints Caused By Driving

 

Author: Julie Donnelly, LMT – The Pain Relief Expert

Editor: Dr. Steve Chaney

Driving and shin pain happens to many people. Fortunately, relief is easy to get with just a few minutes of focused self-treatment.

If you drive long distances you are repetitively straining the muscle that runs down the outside of your shin bone. The muscle called tibialis anterior spans from below your knee along your shin bone and inserting into your arch.  It can become so tight that the fibers will begin to pull away from the bone, a condition called “shin splints.”  This is a painful condition and is easy to fix.  Continue reading for

Shin Splint Treatment You Can Do Yourself

shin splint treatmentTo find the muscle, press your fingers on the thick muscle that is just to the outside of your shin bone. Pick up the front of your foot, and then press down, like you are applying pressure to your gas pedal.  You’ll feel the muscle contracting under your fingertips.  As you are driving for hours, the muscle can get so strained you’ll have shin pain all the way to the front of your ankle.

There are several things you can do for shin splint treatment and relieving the tightness of this muscle. You can use the Julstro Perfect Ball (don’t leave home without it), or a tennis ball which is less effective but will work. Place the ball at the top of the muscle, just below your knee. Then press down hard and slide all the way to your ankle. Curling your toes as shown will help stop the feeling of a cramp in your arch.

You’ll find a tender point about mid-way down the muscle, it may even feel like a bump.  This is the common site of the spasm that is shortening the muscle fibers and causing them to put pressure onto your shin bone. Keep pressing your lower leg into the ball until it doesn’t hurt any longer.  You’ve gone a long way to releasing the tension in the muscle and eliminating the pain.

pain free living bookMy book, Treat Yourself to Pain Free Living , or the Lower Body DVD, demonstrates how to do the treatments easily. If the muscle is really tight, the treatment will be a bit painful, so only apply enough pressure that it “hurts so good.”  You’ll be so glad you took the time to stop and work out the tension in your leg, it will make the rest of your trip safer and a lot more pleasant!  Once you have experienced the success, you will not forget this shin splint treatment.

Wishing you well,

Julie Donnelly

 

 

About The Author

julie donnellyJulie 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.

Congenital Heart Defects Prevention with Folic Acid?

by

Does Methyl Folate Work As Well?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

 

congenital heart defects preventionCan folic acid aid in congenital heart defects prevention?

Every once in a while, a scientific study revolutionizes the practice of medicine and transforms how we lead our lives. The study showing that folic acid supplementation reduced the risk of neural tube defects in newborns was such a study.

First a little history: Dr. Richard Smithells and his colleague Elizabeth Hibbard first started to suspect that folic acid deficiencies were linked to neural tube defects such as spina bifida in the early 60s. By the early 70’s there was enough circumstantial evidence for this link that most doctors were recommending pregnant women start on a prenatal supplement containing folic acid once their pregnancy was confirmed by the obstetrician.

That was when Dr. Smithells convinced the Medical Research Council (MRC) of England to conduct a major, multi-center trial to definitively test his hypothesis. The MRC study (MRC Vitamin Study Research Group, Lancet 338: 131–137, 1991) was terminated in 1991 when it became clear that it was unethical to continue withholding folic acid from the placebo group. The study clearly showed:

  • Folic acid supplementation reduced the incidence of neural tube defects in newborns by 72%.
  • Supplementation with folic acid must start prior to conception for maximum efficacy. If women waited until their pregnancy was confirmed by their doctor, the benefits of folic acid supplementation were much weaker. By then, as the old saying goes: “The horse was already out of the barn”.
  • Subsequent studies have shown that folic acid supplementation is effective at reducing neural tube defects even when the mother and/or baby have MTHFR deficiencies.

As I mentioned before, this study revolutionized medicine and public health in this country.

  • The U. S. Public Health Service and CDC changed their recommendation to “All women of childbearing age should consume at least 400 micrograms of folic acid daily to prevent neural tube defects.
  • Starting in 1998, the United States and Canada mandated folic acid fortification of all flour, enriched pasta, and cornmeal.

 

What About Congenital Heart Defects Prevention?

 

folic acid congenital heart defectsWith the clear success of folic acid reducing the risk of neural tube defects, it was natural to ask whether folic acid supplementation might also help with congenital heart defects prevention. Heart defects affect 1% of all newborn babies. While they can often be treated with surgery, that is horribly expensive and not always successful.

As with neural tube defects, previous clinical studies have provided clear evidence that supplementation with at least 400 mcg/day of folic acid reduces the risk of heart defects in newborns. A meta-analysis of 18 clinical studies estimates the risk-reduction at 28% (Scientific Reports, 5: 8506, DOI: 10.1038/srep08506 ).

The authors of this study (Liu et al, Circulation 134: 647-655, 2016 ) set out to determine whether folic acid fortification had significantly reduced newborn heart defects in Canada. They utilized a database of the Canadian Institute for Health Information that covered 98% of births and stillbirths between 1990 and 2011.

Did folic acid supplementation aid in congenital heart defects prevention?

Of the 5,901,701 births and stillbirths in this database, 72,591 were diagnosed with some type of heart defect. The investigators then compared the prevalence of heart defects before and after 1998 to determine the effect of folic acid fortification on heart defects.

 

Does Folic Acid Aid in Congenital Heart Defects Prevention?

 

folic acid fortifiedThe results of the study were clear cut. Folic acid fortification of flour:

  • Reduced heart outflow abnormalities by 27%.
  • Reduced narrowing of the aorta by 23%.
  • Reduced holes in the heart wall separating the chambers by 15%.

Some types of heart defects were not significantly affected by folic acid fortification, so the overall reduction in newborns with heart defects was 11%.

The paper concluded “Although food fortification with folic acid was aimed primarily at reducing neural tube defects, this population based intervention may also have had a beneficial effect on specific types of [heart defects], which in aggregate are more common.”

Overall, folic acid fortification (providing an extra 100 mcg/day folic acid) did not appear to be as effective as supplementation with 400 mcg/day folic acid at reducing total heart defects in newborns. Perhaps because of that, the senior investigator in the study was quoted as saying “Women who are likely to get pregnant should start taking folic acid supplements before getting pregnant as they may not necessarily receive adequate folate from diet alone.”

 

Does Methyl Folate Aid in Congenital Heart Defects Prevention as Well?

methyl folate mythMethyl folate is being widely promoted as safer, more natural, better absorbed, and more effective than folic acid. I have thoroughly debunked the first three claims in my video “The Truth About Methyl Folate.”

What about the claim that methyl folate is more effective than folic acid?

The fact is we don’t even know whether methyl folate is even as effective as folic acid. The studies on neural tube defects and heart defects were done with folic acid, not methyl folate. There are literally thousands of studies on the health benefits of folic acid. Almost all of them were done with folic acid, not methyl folate. It is reasonable to assume that methyl folate might be as beneficial as folic acid, but without clinical studies we simply don’t know.

The few clinical studies that have used methyl folate have not included patients that were given folic acid instead of methyl folate. Without that kind of direct comparison, it is impossible to know whether methyl folate is less effective, the same, or more effective than folic acid.

Finally, there is the claim that methyl folate is more effective than folic acid in people with MTHFR deficiencies. Until we start seeing clinical studies directly comparing the effect of methyl folate and folic acid supplementation on health outcomes in people with MTHFR deficiencies, it is impossible to verify that claim. Once again, methyl folate might be less effective, the same, or more effective than folic acid. We simply don’t know.

Folic Acid does aid in congenital heart defects prevention and methyl folate may.

 

The Bottom Line

 

  • It has been clearly established that folic acid supplementation reduces the risk of neural tube defects in newborns, and that food fortification with folic acid has also helped reduce the incidence of neural tube defects.
  • Previous studies have also shown that folic acid supplementation reduces the risk of heart defects in newborns.
  • A recent study has shown that food fortification with folic acid also contributes to a reduction in the risk of giving birth to babies with heart defects.
  • The U. S. Public Health Service and CDC recommend “All women of childbearing age should consume at least 400 micrograms of folic acid daily to prevent neural tube defects.” Based on the latest studies, folic acid aids in congenital heart defects prevention as well.
  • The studies on neural tube defects and heart defects were done with folic acid, not methyl folate. It is reasonable to assume that methyl folate might be as beneficial as folic acid, but without clinical studies we simply don’t know whether it is even as effective as folic acid.
  • As for other claims about methyl folate, there are no clinical studies I am aware of directly comparing methyl folate and folic acid. Without that kind of study, it is impossible to know whether methyl folate is less effective, the same, or more effective than folic acid.

 

For details, read the article above.

 

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.

DHA During Pregnancy; Yes or No?

by

Are Pregnant Women Deficient In Omega-3s?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

 

dha during pregnancyDo women need DHA during pregnancy?  Most experts agree that omega-3 fatty acids, especially DHA, are essential for fetal development during pregnancy and for brain development through at least the first two years of a child’s life. That’s because DHA is an important component of the myelin sheath that coats and protects our brain neurons.

During the last two trimesters of pregnancy and the first two years of a child’s life, their brains are growing and maturing at a remarkable rate. The need for DHA during this critical period is huge, and most of that DHA comes from the mom. That’s why the mom’s intake of DHA during pregnancy and breastfeeding is so important.

For example, higher intakes of omega-3s during pregnancy and breastfeeding have been associated with:

  • Decreased maternal depression.
  • Increased birth weight.
  • Reduced risk of preterm birth.
  • Reduction in ADHD symptoms.
  • Reduction in allergies and asthma.
  • Improved developmental and cognitive outcomes such as:
    • Increased visual acuity.
    • Better problem-solving skills.

I do wish to acknowledge that there is still debate in the scientific literature about the strength of some of these associations. However, there is enough cumulative evidence for the beneficial effects of omega-3s especially DHA during pregnancy and breastfeeding that virtually all experts agree adequate maternal omega-3 intake is important during this crucial period in a child’s life.

 

How Much DHA During Pregnancy & Breastfeeding Is Needed?

fish oil dha during pregnancyThe National Academies of Science have not yet set a Daily Value for omega-3s. However, a group of experts met in 1999 to recommend adequate dietary intake of omega-3s (Simopoulos et al, Prostaglandins, Leukotrienes & Essential Fatty Acids, 63: 119-121, 2000 ). They concluded that an adequate intake of omega-3 fatty acids in adults was at least 650 mg/day with at least 440 mg/day of that coming from EPA + DHA (220 mg/day each of EPA and DHA). They further recommended that DHA intake in pregnant and lactating women should be at least 300 mg/day.

However, because of concerns about seafood contamination with heavy metals and PCBs (both of which are neurotoxins), the FDA recommended in 2004 that pregnant and lactating women limit seafood consumption to two servings a week, which amounts to about 200 mg/day of DHA. This has been subsequently adopted by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the European Union as the recommended amount of DHA during pregnancy and lactation (Coletta et al, Reviews in Obstetrics & Gynecology, 3, 163-171, 2010 ).

How Was The Study Done?

The authors of this study (Nordgren et al, Nutrients, 2017, 9, 197; doi:10.3390/nu9030197 ) utilized a nationwide database called NHANES (National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey). NHANES data are based on an annual survey conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) to assess the health and nutritional status of adults and children in the United States, and to track changes over time.

Dietary intake of nutrients is based on two interviewer-administered, 24-hour dietary recalls conducted 3-10 days apart. Omega-3 intake was calculated based on the USDA database of nutrient composition of foods.

The investigators combined NHANES data from the years 2003 to 2012. This included 6478 women of childbearing years (14-45 years old), of which 788 were pregnant at the time of the survey.

Are Pregnant Women Deficient In Omega-3s?

omega3 deficiency in pregnant womenThe results of this study were alarming:

  • Mean EPA + DHA intake was only 89 mg/day with no difference between pregnant and non-pregnant women of childbearing age.
  • This contrasts to the expert committee’s recommendation of at least 440 mg/day for EPA + DHA (220 mg/day each from EPA and DHA).
  • Mean DHA intake was only 66 mg/day in pregnant and 58 mg/day in non-pregnant women of childbearing status.
  • This contrasts to the recommendations of 200 – 300 mg/day for pregnant women.
  • These intakes did not include dietary supplements, but only 1.8% of non-pregnant and 9% of pregnant women in this survey took supplements containing EPA and/or DHA.

The authors concluded “Our results demonstrate that omega-3 fatty acid intake is a concern in pregnant women and women of childbearing age…” They went on to say: ‘Strategies to increase omega-3 fatty acid intake in these populations could have the potential to improve maternal and infant health outcomes.”

What Do Other Studies Show?

This study is not an outlier. In a previous issue  Do Women Get Enough Omega-3 During Pregnancy of “Health Tips From the Professor” I reported on a study showing that 90% of Canadian women were not getting enough DHA in their diet. A similar study in Germany concluded that 97% of middle-aged women had suboptimal omega-3 status (Gellert et al, Prostaglandins, Leukotrienes and Essential Fatty Acids, doi: 10.1016/j.plefa.2017.01.009 ).

More importantly, these omega-3 deficiencies matter. In another issue DHA Supplements During Pregnancy of “Health Tips From the Professor” I reported on a study showing that DHA supplementation significantly reduced preterm births. Based on that effect alone, the authors concluded that DHA supplementation during pregnancy could save the US healthcare system close to $6 billion/year.

Women do need DHA during pregnancy.

The Bottom Line

  • Optimal intake of omega-3s during pregnancy and breastfeeding is associated with:
    • Decreased maternal depression.
    • Increased birth weight.
    • Reduced risk of preterm birth.
    • Reduction in ADHD symptoms.
    • Reduction in allergies and asthma.
    • Improved developmental and cognitive outcomes such as:
      • Increased visual acuity.
      • Better problem-solving skills.
  • In 1999, a panel of experts met to set standards for omega-3 intake. They recommended:
    • At least 650 mg/day for adults with at least 440 mg/day coming from EPA + DHA (220 mg/day each of EPA and DHA).
    • At least 300 mg/day of DHA for pregnant and breastfeeding women.
  • Because of concerns about seafood contamination with heavy metals and PCBs (both of which are neurotoxins), the FDA reduced the recommendation for pregnant and breastfeeding women to 200 mg/day of DHA. That recommendation has been subsequently adopted by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the European Union.
  • A recent study has found:
    • Mean EPA + DHA intake was only 89 mg/day with no difference between pregnant and non-pregnant women of childbearing age.
      • This contrasts to the expert committee’s recommendation of at least 440 mg/day (with 220 mg/day each from EPA and DHA).
    • Mean DHA intake was only 66 mg/day in pregnant and 58 mg/day in non-pregnant women of childbearing status.
      • This contrasts to the recommendations of 200 – 300 mg/day for pregnant and breastfeeding women.
    • These intakes did not include dietary supplements, but only 1.8% of non-pregnant and 9% of pregnant women in this survey took supplements containing EPA and/or DHA.
    • This study is in line with recent studies in Canada and Germany. Clearly pregnant and Breastfeeding women in developed countries like the US are getting suboptimal amounts of omega-3s in their diet.
    • This is alarming because these findings come amidst mounting evidence that optimal omega-3 intake during pregnancy and breastfeeding is important for the health of both mother and child.

     

    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.

6 Tips For Choosing The Best Multivitamin Supplement

by

Don’t Fall For Misleading Marketing Claims

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

best multivitamin supplementThere are lots of multivitamin-multimineral products in the marketplace. Every company must differentiate their product from the competition to win their market share. When that differentiation is based on quality, purity, and clinical proof the product works, I am all for it. May the best company win.  Many claim to offer the best multivitamin supplement.

However, the pressure to win market share is intense. Quality controls and clinical studies are expensive. All too often companies try to differentiate their multivitamin-multimineral products based on marketing hype and/or worthless ingredients that subtract money from your wallet without adding anything of value to your health.

With so many claims and counter claims in the marketplace, it has become almost impossible for the average consumer to know which claims are true and which are false. Everyone wants to get the best multivitamin-multimineral for their health at the least possible cost. Perhaps that is why I am so frequently asked for guidance on how to choose the best multivitamin supplement.

In this week’s article, I will give you 6 tips you can use to select the multivitamin-multimineral product that is best for you. I will tell you what to look for in a good multivitamin and which marketing claims you should just ignore.

How Are Nutritional Standards Set?

The standards for nutritional supplements are set in a two-step process.

Step 1: In the first step, The Institute of Medicine (IOM) of the National Academies of Sciences selects a committee of experts called the Food and Nutrition Board to set standards for a specific set of nutrients. They set 3 kinds of standards:

  • Recommended Dietary Allowances or RDAs are the average daily dietary intake level sufficient to meet the nutrient requirements of nearly all (97-98 percent) healthy individuals in a group.
  • Adequate Intakes or AIs are established when evidence is insufficient to develop an RDA and are set at a level assumed to ensure nutritional adequacy.
  • Where toxicity is a potential concern, Tolerable Upper Limits or ULs represent the maximum daily intake unlikely to cause adverse health effects.
  • Just to confuse things, all three standards are all part of what is called Dietary Reference Intakes or DRIs.

Step 2: The DRIs are specific for age, gender, pregnancy & lactation. It would be hopelessly complicated to use DRIs for the nutrition labels on foods and supplements. Therefore, the FDA sets a Daily Value (DV) for the purposes of food and supplement labeling. Originally, DVs were set based on the highest DRI for a specific nutrient. However, the FDA has recently devised a new set of DV standards that will be appearing on food and supplement labels between now and July 26, 2018.

How to Choose the Best Multivitamin Supplement

nutritional supplement#1: Good Product Design Still Matters

Comparing nutrition labels on multivitamin-multimineral supplements can be tricky. Some supplements only provide 5-10% the Daily Value (DV) for some nutrients. Are those nutrients unimportant? Some supplements provide hundreds or thousands % of the DV for other nutrients. Is more better?

Often companies will quote some random scientist or one or two clinical studies to support the mix of nutrients they include in their multivitamin-multimineral supplement. Don’t fall for their marketing hype.

The only valid nutritional standards for multivitamin-multimineral products in the United States are set by the Food & Nutrition Board of the Institute of Medicine. They are the standards you should look for in evaluating nutrition labels.

That’s because the National Academies of Sciences is the real deal. The National Academies represents the top 1-2% of scientists in the country. To be selected to the National Academies you must be nominated by an Academy member, and voted on by the entire Academy. Selection is based on your research contributions over decades. (No, I am not a member of the Academy, but thanks for thinking that question).

The Institute of Medicine of the National Academies of Sciences selects the best of the best to serve on the Food and Nutrition Board. They are world renowned experts who review all the pertinent literature (not just one or two studies). They decide on which nutrients are essential and how much of them we need.

It always amazes me that some companies pretend they know more than the Food and Nutrition Board. It amazes me even more that some people believe those companies.

With that in mind, this is what to look for when comparing nutrition labels and trying to choose the best multivitamin supplement:

  • The FDA has set Daily Value (DV) recommendations for 24 vitamins and minerals (23 if the supplement is for adult men or postmenopausal women and does not contain iron). Make sure your multivitamin-multimineral has all 24. Count them. If a company leaves out an essential nutrient, they are not required to list it on the label.
  • The Food and Nutrition Board has classified several other nutrients as essential, but does not feel there have been enough studies to establish a DRI. Without a DRI, the FDA cannot set a DV. Those nutrients are represented with a “dagger” symbol on the label with the footnote “Daily Value not established.”  These are useful additions to a multivitamin-multimineral supplement, provided they are not present in excess.
  • Ignore anything companies list on their nutrition labels that does not have a %DV value or a “dagger” symbol. This is often just marketing hype. In some cases, the ingredients have no proven benefit. In many other cases, it’s just not possible to put enough of them in a multivitamin-multimineral tablet to provide any real benefit.

vitmain and minerals#2: Look For Balance

This is another area in which we need to be guided by the recommendations of the Food and Nutrition Board of the IOM. One of the reasons many experts recommend that people get their vitamins and minerals from foods rather than from supplements is because many supplements are unbalanced. That’s a problem because there are many cases in which too much of one nutrient can interfere with the absorption or metabolism of related nutrients. For example,

  • Zinc and copper compete for absorption. For best absorption and maximal utilization by the body, the zinc to copper ratio should be close to 1:1 based on DV.
  • B vitamins should be in balance. Look for a multivitamin-multimineral supplement that provides 100-200% of the DV for all 8 essential B vitamins. (The levels can be higher in a B Complex supplement, but they should still be in balance.)

Some manufacturers will leave out the expensive B vitamins and load up on the cheap ones. This saves them money. It also allows them to use marketing terms like “mega” or “super.”  A supplement that provides 50% or less of the DV for some B vitamins and 1,000% or more of the DV for others is ridiculous. There is absolutely no rationale for a ratio like that except to mislead consumers.

  • As for the other nutrients in multivitamin-multimineral supplements, they should not be significantly below 50% or significantly above 250% of the DV.
  • Unfortunately, the new DVs will introduce some confusion when they start appearing on supplement labels. That’s because in some cases, the new DVs are significantly different than the RDAs established by the Institute of Medicine. I would not fault a company for basing their ingredient amounts based on RDA recommendation rather than DVs. However, there is no good rationale for providing 500% DV or more for any nutrient in a multivitamin-multimineral supplement.
  • Calcium, magnesium, and phosphorous are a special case. They are bulky, so many manufacturers only provide 5-10% of them in their multivitamin-multimineral supplements. This is not ideal because many of the nutrients in a multivitamin-multimineral supplement are required for optimal utilization of calcium and magnesium in bone formation.

Many Americans get only 50% of the DV for calcium and magnesium in their diet. Thus, it makes good sense to provide 30-50% of the DV for calcium and magnesium in a multivitamin multimineral supplement. Most Americans get close to the DV for phosphorous from their diet, so the amount of phosphorous in a supplement is not particularly important.

hype#3: Don’t Fall For The Hype

In their attempts to differentiate themselves, many companies claim that they use a more natural or a better utilized form of the vitamin or mineral than their competitors. Ignore those claims. They are just marketing hype. For example,

  • In previous issues of “Health Tips From the Professor” I have debunked the claims that folate and methyl folate  are more natural, safer and more effective than folic acid. The claims that alternate chemical forms of other vitamins are more natural, safer, and more effective are equally bogus.
  • The claims by some manufacturers that they use a form of calcium that is more readily absorbed is not just misleading. It is the wrong question. Calcium in our bloodstream can do bad things (like calcification and hardening of the arteries) if it is not quickly utilized for bone formation.

Thus, the important question is how well the calcium is utilized for bone formation. Look for clinical studies showing that the calcium in their multivitamin-multimineral supplement is efficiently utilized for bone formation rather than hype about how quickly it gets into the bloodstream.

  • There is a good reason that many supplement companies continue to use ingredients like folic acid for B9, cyanocobalamin for B12, pyridoxine for B6, etc. All of them are supported by hundreds of clinical studies showing that they are safe and effective. I have no issue with companies choosing to use different forms of these vitamins. Just don’t fall for their hype that the forms they are using are somehow more natural, safer or more effective than the traditionally-used forms of the same vitamin.

buzz words#4: Don’t Fall For Buzz Words

Some manufacturers attempt to differentiate their products by claiming they are natural, organic, non-GMO, or are made from food. The companies are attaching buzz words to their product that they know resonate with the American people. Don’t believe them. Those claims are all bogus. They are marketing hype. For example,

  • There is no standard for “natural” so companies are not required to provide any evidence to back up their claim. If they claim that their product is natural, ask for a detailed list of the source and processing method for all their ingredients. If they are unwilling or unable to provide you with that information, don’t believe their claim of natural.
  • “Organic” certification for a supplement simply means that ingredients come from crops raised using organic methods. It is no guarantee of purity. Organically grown crops can still be contaminated if the air, soil or water is contaminated from any nearby pollution source. For example, ground water pollution is the major source of the heavy metal contamination often seen in rice-derived ingredients. It is far more important to select your supplement based on rigorous quality control standards that assure it is pure.
  • A “non-GMO” designation is useful for foods and for protein, but it is meaningless for the ingredients in a multivitamin-multimineral supplement. Those ingredients have been extensively purified. They contain no genetic information. They are chemically indistinguishable from purified ingredients obtained from GMO sources. If you would like more detailed information about the GMO controversy, I have provided a balanced perspective on GMO in a recent video.
  • Claims by some companies that their vitamins are derived from foods are completely bogus. That is a physical impossibility. For example, let’s look at what it would take to provide the DV for just 3 of the nutrients in a single multivitamin pill, assuming they started with the best food sources of those 3 nutrients:
  • It would take 1 cup of cooked lentils, 2 cups of cooked spinach, or 4 cups of cooked broccoli to provide the DV for folic acid.
  • It would take 1 cup of sunflower seeds, 1.5 cups of pistachio nuts, or 7 ounces of cooked tuna to provide the DV for vitamin B6.
  • It would take 5 ounces of cooked chicken breast, 1 cup of peanuts, or 6 cups of green peas to provide the DV for niacin.

That’s just 3 nutrients and one multivitamin tablet. You do the math. If they will lie to you about their vitamins coming from foods, they will probably lie about other things as well.

#5: Don’t Fall For Scare Tactics

Some companies try to scare you into buying their products by claiming their competitors are using unsafe ingredients. These claims are usually bogus, but it is useful to understand where this misinformation comes from.

dark sideThere is a lot of unfounded hysteria on the internet about product ingredients. Much of this hysteria has been fueled by a few well-known bloggers. I believe their intentions were pure in the beginning. They started by warning the public about truly dangerous ingredients like artificial colors, flavors, preservatives and sweeteners.

However, blogging has a dark side. To capture a large audience, your blog posts need to be sensational every week. As the weeks go by it becomes harder and harder to find subject matter that is both sensational and accurate. That’s when some bloggers go over to “the dark side.”

They become more concerned about the size of their audience than the accuracy of the information they post. They start vilifying ingredients that are perfectly safe as long as the manufacturer purifies them correctly and tests them for purity. These are ingredients which might be of concern for products made by a company with poor quality controls, but pose no concern for products made by a company with high quality control standards. In other words, they should not be spreading hysteria about the ingredient. They should be focusing on some of the real quality control issues in our industry.

To help you sort through all the hysteria about product ingredients, I have previously published a two-part series on ingredients in which I sorted through the claims and divided common ingredients into the good, the bad, and the ugly.

clinically proven#6: Demand Proof

This is the most important tip of all. Many companies make wild claims about their products but feel no need to back up their claims. Ignore their hype and demand they give proof to back up their claims.

  • If they claim their products are pure, ask how many quality control tests they run on their products.
  • If they claim their products work, ask for proof. Ask for clinical studies:
    • That have been done with people, not with animals, cell culture, or test tubes*
    • That have been published in peer-reviewed scientific journals.
    • That have been done with their product, not studies done with another product.

*Animal, cell culture and test tube studies are valid if they are used to identify a potential mechanism of action, but should not be cited as proof the product works. For ethical reasons, I prefer companies that do not use animal studies.

 

The Bottom Line: 6 Tips For Choosing The Best Multivitamin Supplement

 

Everyone would like to get the best multivitamin-multimineral for their health at the least possible cost. However, there are lots of multivitamin-multimineral products in the marketplace. The pressure to win market share is intense. Quality controls and clinical studies are expensive. All too often companies try to differentiate their multivitamin-multimineral products based on marketing hype.

With so many claims and counter claims in the marketplace, it has become almost impossible for the average consumer to know how to choose the best multivitamin-multimineral product. In this week’s article, I give you 6 tips you can use to select the best multivitamin supplement for you. I will tell you what to look for in a good multivitamin and which marketing claims you should just ignore.

  • Start with the nutrition label. A good multivitamin-multimineral supplement should contain all 24 essential nutrients recommended by the Food and Nutrition Board of the Institute of Medicine (23 if the supplement is without iron). Anything else is probably marketing hype.
  • Make sure the nutrients are in the correct balance. Again, your evaluation should be guided by the Institute of Medicine.
  • Don’t fall for the hype. Many companies claim that they use a more natural, safer, or better utilized form of the vitamin or mineral than their competitors. Ignore those claims. They are usually just marketing hype
  • Don’t fall for buzz words. Some companies attempt to differentiate their products by claiming they are natural, organic, non-GMO, or are made from food. The companies are attaching buzz words to their product that they know resonate with the American people. Don’t believe them. Those claims are all bogus. They do nothing to improve your health. They are marketing hype.
  • Don’t fall for scare tactics. Some companies try to scare you into buying their products by claiming their competitors are using unsafe ingredients. These claims are usually bogus.
  • Demand poof. This is the most important tip of all. Many companies make wild claims about their products but feel no need to back up their claims. Ignore their hype and demand they give proof to back up their claims.
  • If they claim their products are pure, ask how many quality control tests they run on their products.
  • If they claim their products work, ask for proof. Ask for clinical studies:
    • That have been done with people, not with animals, cell culture, or test tubes.
    • That have been published in peer-reviewed scientific journals.
    • That have been done with their product, not studies done with another product.

For more details about each of those tips, read the article above.

 

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.

How To Treat Tight Hamstrings

by

Stretching Hamstrings Can Cause Them To Tear

Author: Julie Donnelly, LMT – The Pain Relief Expert

Editor: Dr. Steve Chaney

 

how to treat tight hamstrings“Don’t stretch your hamstrings” is the opposite advice to that given to the vast majority of athletes, especially runners. There is good reason to stop before you stretch, and consider why your hamstrings feel tight in the first place before determining how to treat tight hamstrings.

I received a message about a hamstring injury on one of the forums that I moderate. The message came from a father who was concerned about his 12YO son, an avid athlete. While stretching his hamstrings, he heard a “pop” and immediately felt pain at his butt and behind his knee. A few days had passed and the boy was still having hamstring pain while sitting and walking.

The first thing someone may tell him is to stretch, and that’s the last thing that should be done. He needs to get an MRI to make sure that his hamstring tendon isn’t torn. If that’s okay, then he needs to look more in depth to find out why his hamstrings are tight.

Why Your Hamstrings May Be Overstretched

overstretched hamstringsVery often your hamstrings will feel tight even though they are actually being overstretched!  Your hamstrings originate on your posterior pelvis, and one of your quadriceps muscles originates on the front of your pelvis. The quadriceps muscle is Rectus Femoris which goes from your pelvis, over your kneecap and down to your shin bone.

When your Rectus Femoris is tight, it will pull your pelvis down in the front. This causes your pelvis to move up in the back, and your hamstrings get overstretched. Your hamstrings feel tight, but if you then try to stretch them, you could tear them. In fact, if they are tight enough, you could actually pull the tendon away from the bone.

I’ve found that your hamstrings will often release on their own when you treat your quadriceps. As your quadriceps aren’t pulling down on the front of your pelvis, it allows your posterior pelvis to go down. As your posterior pelvis goes down, it releases the over-stretch from your hamstrings.

How to Treat Tight Hamstrings

release quadricep tensionPay attention to tight quadriceps when deciding how to treat tight hamstrings.

Fortunately, it’s really easy to release the tension in your quadriceps. I teach these treatments, and many more, in my book: Treat Yourself To Pain-Free Living.

In this picture, I’m using the Julstro Power Roller to push (don’t roll) from the top of my thigh to just above my knee.

I’ve found that the Power Roller gives more focused strength than using a foam roller. Also, tools that have beads that roll can’t go deep enough to reach the lower fibers of this thick muscle.

You’ll find a big spasm, which feels like a bump, at the point shown in this picture. When you go over the spasm, it will hurt so start out slow and build up strength to go deeper.

Also, treating your quadriceps will not only help release your hamstrings, but it is also the treatment for knee pain. This helps you eliminate two painful conditions, not just one! This is also one of the series of treatments for releasing low back, hip, and groin pain. It’s an especially good self-treatment to learn. You can also do this treatment while sitting in a chair with your knee slightly bent.

 How to Treat Tight Hamstrings While Treating Spasms

treat tight hamstringsAFTER you treat your quadriceps, then you can treat your hamstrings. The picture on the left not only treats the spasms, but it also stretches your hamstrings.

I prefer the Julstro Perfect Ball  over any other type of ball.  The Perfect Ball is solid in the middle and soft on the outside, giving great pressure without hurting the muscle.

Put the Perfect Ball on a hard surface such as a wooden stool or corner of a desk.

Rest your hamstrings on top of the ball, moving until you find the spasm in the muscle.

Finish by straightening your leg which will stretch your hamstrings. Go slowly and don’t strain the muscle, just move to a “hurts so good” level.

pain free living bookTreat Yourself to Pain-Free Living  shows you how to treat spasms from your head to your feet. If you are in pain, or if you love sports and your joints feel tight, this book will become your favorite “tool!”

Now, you know how to treat tight hamstrings.

Wishing you well,

Julie Donnelly

 

About The Author

julie donnelly

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.

Premature Death: Reduce Your Risk by 31%

by

Add 3.4 Disease-Free Years To Your Life

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

reduce premature deathIf you could reduce your risk of:

  • Heart Disease (primarily heart attack) by 24%,
  • Stroke by 33%,
  • Cancer by 14%
  • Premature death by 31% (That would add approximately 3.4 years of disease-free years to your lifespan),

Would you be interested in knowing more?

What if you could enjoy all these benefits:

  • Without it costing you an extra penny?
  • Without any side effects?
  • And you felt great?

Would you like to know the secret?  The secret is a diet rich in fruits and vegetables – probably a lot more fruits and vegetables than you are currently eating. Let’s look at the evidence.

How Was The Study Done?

reduce heart attacksYou may be saying “That’s not news. I’ve heard that before.” Yes, there have probably been hundreds of clinical studies looking at the benefits of diets rich in fruits and vegetables. There have also been several meta-analyses that have combined the data from many individual studies to improve that statistical power of their conclusions.

However, this study (Aune et al, International Journal of Epidemiology, DOI: 10.1093/ije/dyw319 ) is unique.

  • It is the largest and most comprehensive meta-analysis looking at the benefits of fruit & vegetable consumption ever undertaken.
  • It analyzed 142 published clinical studies with over 2.1 million subjects from around the globe.
  • There were 43,000 cases of heart disease, 47,000 cases of stroke, 112,000 cases of cancer, and 94,000 deaths in these studies.
  • It had enough statistical power to determine even minor effects of fruit and vegetable intake.
  • It is the first meta-analysis with enough data to accurately determine the optimal intake of fruits and vegetables.

 

Premature Death:  Reduce Your Risk By 31%

reduce premature death by eating fruits and vegetablesFor most of the health outcomes examined in this study, the optimal intake of fruits and vegetables was 10 servings a day. When they compared people who were consuming 10 servings a day to people who were consuming less than one serving a day,

  • Heart disease was reduced by 28%.
  • Stroke was reduced by 33%.
  • Premature death was decreased by 31%.
  • The fruits and vegetables most strongly associated with this benefit were apples, pears, citrus fruit, green leafy vegetables, and cruciferous vegetables.

For cancer, the optimal intake of fruits and vegetables was 6 servings a day. When they compared people who were consuming 6 servings a day to people who were consuming less than one serving a day,

  • Cancer was reduced by 14%.
  • The fruits and vegetables most strongly associated with reduced cancer risk were green vegetables such as green beans, yellow vegetables such as peppers and carrots, and cruciferous vegetables.

The authors speculated that the relatively small reduction in cancer risk they observed may have been because they were looking at total cancer cases rather than looking at individual cancers. Previous studies have suggested that fruits and vegetables reduce the risk of some cancers much more than others.

Finally, the authors estimated that:

  • 6 million premature deaths/year worldwide could be prevented if people consumed 6 servings of fruits and vegetables a day, and…
  • 8 million premature deaths/year worldwide could be prevented if people consumed 10 servings of fruits and vegetables a day.

What Does This Mean For You?

When the USDA rolled out the “Food Guide Pyramid” in 1992, they recommended 2-4 servings of fruit and 3-5 servings of vegetables a day. They tried educating the American public for almost a decade to no avail. Only 3% of Americans even came close to that recommendation.

In 2011 they threw in the towel and introduced “My Plate”, which recommended 5 servings (2 fruits and 3 vegetables). This is also the current recommendation of the WHO and England. “How well are we doing with this recommendation?”, you might ask.

good news bad newsThe answer is “not very well.”  The bad news is the CDC estimates that less than 13% of Americans eat 2 servings of fruit and 2-3 servings of vegetables a day. An average American eats one serving of fruit a day and less than 2 servings of vegetables a day. Clearly, we have a long way to go.

My guess is that only vegans come close to the recommended 10 servings a day, and that’s only if they skimp on beans, nuts, and grains so they can load up on fruits and vegetables.

The good news is every added serving of fruits and vegetables is beneficial. The authors of the study estimate that for every increase of 2.5 servings a day:

  • Heart disease would be reduced by 8%
  • Stroke would be reduced by 13%
  • Cancer would be reduced by 3%.
  • Premature death would be reduced by 10%

If we were to increase our intake of fruits and vegetables to even 6 servings a day:

  • Heart disease would be reduced by 16%
  • Stroke would be reduced by 22%
  • Cancer would be reduced by 13%.
  • Premature death would be reduced by 27%.

What About Supplementation?

The authors of the study stated: “Most likely it is the whole package of beneficial nutrients you obtain by eating fruits and vegetables that is crucial to health. This is why it is important to eat whole plant foods to get the benefit, instead of taking antioxidant or vitamin supplements…”

I agree in principle. It is impossible to duplicate the myriad of nutrients found in whole foods in a supplement. More importantly, we can do better. We should all work towards increasing the amount of fruits and vegetables in our diet.

However,

  • When there is such a huge gap between what Americans are eating and the optimal intake of fruits and vegetables, and…
  • The USDA has tried for decades to get Americans to eat more fruits and vegetables without success, and…
  • We know many of the beneficial nutrients found in those fruits and vegetables…

Supplementation also makes sense. Choose a company that you can trust and try to fill the gap between what you need and what you are getting from your diet.  And, increase your intake of fruits and vegetables to decrease your risk of premature death.

 

The Bottom Line

 

  • A new meta-analysis that combined the data from 142 published clinical studies with over 2.1 million subjects has concluded that increasing our intake of fruits and vegetables to 10 servings a day would:
    • Reduce heart disease (primarily heart attacks) by 24%.
    • Reduce strokes by 33%.
    • Reduce cancer by 14%.
    • Reduce premature death by 31% (That would add approximately 3.4 years of disease-free years to your lifespan).
    • Result in 7.8 million fewer premature deaths/year worldwide.
  • The bad news is that:
    • The CDC estimates that less than 13% of Americans eat even 2 servings of fruit and 2-3 servings of vegetables a day.
    • The CDC also estimates that the average American eats one serving of fruit and less than 2 servings of vegetables per day.
  • My guess is that only vegans come close to the recommended 10 servings a day, and that’s only if they skimp on beans, nuts, and grains so they can load up on fruits and vegetables.
  • The good news is every added serving of fruits and vegetables is beneficial. The authors of the study estimate that for every increase of 2.5 servings a day:
    • Heart disease would be reduced by 8%
    • Stroke would be reduced by 13%
    • Cancer would be reduced by 3%.
    • Premature death would be reduced by 10%
  • We can do better. We should all work towards increasing the amount of fruits and vegetables in our diet.
  • However,
    • When there is such a huge gap between what Americans are eating and the optimal intake of fruits and vegetables, and…
    • The USDA has tried for decades to get Americans to eat more fruits and vegetables without success, and…
    • We know many of the beneficial nutrients found in those fruits and vegetables…
  • Supplementation also makes sense. Choose a company that you can trust and try to fill the gap between what you need and what you are getting from your diet.

 

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.

Does Diet for Children with ADHD Matter?

by

Could A Healthy Diet Help Your Child?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

 

diet for children with adhdDoes diet for children with ADHD matter?

The prevalence of ADHD appears to be skyrocketing. It increased by 42% in just 8 years between 2003 and 2011. Currently, 4.5 million children in the US are on ADHD medication, at a cost to taxpayers of $45 billion.

Unfortunately, ADHD medications come with serious side effects like loss of appetite and delayed growth, sleep disorders, nausea & stomach pains, headaches, moodiness and irritability. Even more worrisome is that many children say they “just don’t feel right” while they are on the drugs. Finally, there is the unintended message we are sending our children that drugs are the solution to their problems.

It is no wonder that millions of parents are looking for more natural solutions for their child’s ADHD. That is why recent headlines like “The Mediterranean Diet Could Help Children with ADHD” generate such interest.

In this issue of Health Tips From the Professor I have looked at the studies behind the headlines to answer your most pressing questions:

  • Would something as simple as the Mediterranean diet help my child control their ADHD symptoms?
  • Do they have to adhere to the Mediterranean diet, or would other healthy diets work just as well?

Answering these questions will tell us if diet for children with ADHD matters.

adhd dietHow Was The Study Designed?

The study behind the headlines (A Rios-Hernandez et al, Pediatrics DOI: 10.1542/peds.2016-2027) looked at 60 children and adolescents (ages 6-16) from southern Spain who were newly diagnosed with ADHD and compared them with 60 sex- and age-matched controls without ADHD from the same schools.

A food frequency questionnaire was administered by a trained interviewer and a scoring system called KIDMED was used to evaluate adherence to a Mediterranean-type diet. The study excluded children with more severe psychological problems and any children taking ADHD medications or nutritional supplements.

Does Diet for Children with ADHD Matter?

 

  • In a preliminary analysis of the data, the investigators discovered:
    • Breastfeeding was associated with decreased risk of ADHD.
    • Inactivity was associated with increased risk of ADHD.
    • Obesity was associated with increased risk of ADHD.

    child adhd dietOf course, the main point of the study was to investigate whether adherence to a Mediterranean-type diet influenced the risk of developing ADHD. The answer to this question was clear cut.

    • Adherence to a Mediterranean-type diet significantly reduced the risk of ADHD in both children and adolescents.

    So, clearly diet for children with ADHD does matter.

    Next, the investigators used the data obtained from the food frequency questionnaires to ask what components of a Mediterranean diet were most influential in reducing the risk of developing ADHD. These results were also very interesting:

    Dietary components that decreased the risk of ADHD included:

    • Consuming two or more servings of fruit every day (In Spain, the extra servings of fruit were primarily citrus, but presumably other fruits would be just as effective).
    • Consuming fresh or cooked vegetables more than once a day.
    • Consuming fatty fish on a regular basis (2-3 times a week).
    • Consuming grains or rice almost every day.
    • Starting the day with a healthy breakfast.

    Dietary components that increased the risk of ADHD included:

    • Eating at fast food restaurants more than once a week.
    • Skipping breakfast.
    • High consumption of soft drinks.
    • High consumption of candy and sugar.

    What Does This Mean For You?

    foods adhd dietThis study clearly showed that adherence to a Mediterranean diet is associated with a significantly lower incidence of ADHD.

    Of course, this study was conducted in southern Spain where a healthy diet is the Mediterranean diet. The question for people in other parts of the world is whether other healthy diets would work just as well.

    Based on their detailed study of the effect of individual dietary components, it is reasonable to assume that any healthy diet that…

    …emphasized fresh fruits & vegetables, whole grains, omega-3-rich fish, and…

    …started the day with a healthy breakfast, and…

    …minimized (or eliminated) fast foods, sodas, candy & other sweets…

    …would reduce the risk of ADHD.

    Plus, this is an approach that has no side effects. Just side benefits.

    Finally, if you read the study carefully, it is clear a holistic approach is always best. For example:

    • Individual dietary components had small effects on ADHD symptoms.
    • When those individual components were combined into a healthy diet, a major reduction in ADHD symptoms was observed.
    • The study suggested that reduction in ADHD symptoms would be even greater with a healthy lifestyle that included regular exercise and weight control.
    • The authors stated that supplementation could also play a role in reducing ADHD symptoms. They felt the best evidence was for supplementation with omega-3 fatty acids and a multivitamin multimineral supplement.

We can certainly conclude that diet for children with ADHD matters.

 

The Bottom Line

 

A recent study in southern Spain has looked at the relationship between adherence to a healthy Mediterranean diet and the risk of developing ADHD symptoms in children and adolescents.

  • In a preliminary analysis of the data, the investigators discovered:
    • Breastfeeding was associated with decreased risk of ADHD.
    • Inactivity was associated with increased risk of ADHD.
    • Obesity was associated with increased risk of ADHD.
  • These factors were independent of adherence to a Mediterranean diet.
  • Adherence to a Mediterranean-type diet significantly reduced the risk of ADHD in both children and adolescents. This was the major finding of the study.
  • The dietary components in the study that decreased the risk of ADHD were:
    • Consuming two or more servings of fruit every day (In Spain, the extra servings of fruit were primarily citrus, but presumably other fruits would be just as effective).
    • Consuming fresh or cooked vegetables more than once a day.
    • Consuming fatty fish on a regular basis (2-3 times a week).
    • Consuming grains or rice almost every day.
    • Starting the day with a healthy breakfast.
  • The dietary components that increased the risk of ADHD were:
    • Eating at fast food restaurants more than once a week.
    • Skipping breakfast.
    • High consumption of soft drinks.
    • High consumption of candy and sugar.
  • Based on their detailed study of the effect of individual dietary components, it is reasonable to assume that any healthy diet that…
    • …emphasized fresh fruits & vegetables, whole grains, omega-3-rich fish, and…
    • …started the day with a healthy breakfast, and…
    • …minimized (or eliminated) fast foods, sodas, candy & other sweets……would reduce the risk of ADHD.
  • Plus, this is an approach that has no side effects. Just side benefits.
  • Finally, if you read the study carefully, it is clear a holistic approach is always best. That would include:
    • A healthy diet
    • regular exercise and weight control.
    • Supplementation with omega-3 fatty acids and a multivitamin multimineral supplement.

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.

Health Tips From The Professor