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

Emergency Treatment for Calf Cramps

August 18, 2015 by Dr. Steve Chaney

To Stretch or Not To Stretch

Author: Julie Donnelly, LMT – The Pain Relief Expert

Editor: Dr. Steve Chaney

A calf cramp is caused by several different conditions, such as dehydration and mineral deficiency. These each need to be addressed to prevent future calf cramps, but when your calf spasms wake you with a jolt at night or send you crashing to the ground in agony, you need a solution NOW!

And, stretching is definitely NOT the first thing to do.

Emergency Treatment for Calf Cramps

A muscle always contracts 100% before releasing. Once started, a calf cramp will not partially contract and then reverse because you stretch, as it may cause the muscle fibers to tear, which will cause pain to be felt for days afterward.

As a result, it is most beneficial to help your muscle complete the painful contraction before you try to stretch it. It sounds counter-intuitive, but it cuts the time of the calf cramp down, and enables you to start flushing out the toxins that formed during the sudden spasm.

Your muscle will be all knotted up, screaming in pain, so it’s good to practice this self-treatment when you are not having a calf cramp.

Grab your calf muscles as shown in this picture. Hold it tightly, and then as hard as you can, push your two hands together.

The intention is to help the muscle complete the contraction as quickly as possible. During an actual calf cramp it won’t be as “neat” as the picture shows, but anything you can do to shorten the muscle fibers will hasten the completion of the spasm.

Follow These Steps To Release Your Calf Cramps

Hold your hands and continue pushing the muscle together until you can begin to breathe normally again. Continue holding it another 30 seconds, bringing in as much oxygen as possible with slow, deep, breathing.
Release your hands and keep breathing deeply.
Repeat #1. This time it won’t hurt, but you are helping any last muscle fibers to complete the contraction before you move to release the spasm.
Begin to squeeze your entire calf as if you were squeezing water out of a thick towel. Move from the top of your calf and go down toward your ankle. This will feel good, so do it for as long as you can.
It is now safe to stretch your calf muscle because the cramp has completed and you have flushed out the toxins. Stretch slowly, and don’t go past the point of “feels so good”. You don’t want to overstretch.

This calf cramps emergency treatment has been proven successful by endurance athletes who have written to me saying how they could continue their race (or training) without any further pain.

This is a very important tip to share with all athletes. Please tell your friends on Facebook and Twitter, it helps athletes prevent injury and pain.

Wishing you well,

Julie Donnelly

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.

About The Author

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

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

Alternatives To Statins

August 11, 2015 by Dr. Steve Chaney

How Do Stanols And Sterols Lower Cholesterol?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

Are there alternatives to statins? If you have been looking for natural approaches for lowering your cholesterol and protecting your heart, you’ve probably been hearing a lot about plant stanols and sterols lately.

What Are Stanols and Sterols & What Do They Do?

Just what are plant stanols and sterols and why does the National Institutes of Health (NIH) recommend them as a natural approach for lowering cholesterol?

Stanols and sterols are natural substances found in plants that have a structural resemblance to cholesterol. Because they look a lot like cholesterol, they compete with cholesterol for absorption from the intestine into the mucosal cells lining the intestine. However, once they get into the intestinal mucosal cells they are recognized as foreign and are immediately pumped back into the intestine so that they never get into the bloodstream.

Let me give you an analogy. Let’s think of the intestinal mucosal cells as a nightclub. The doorman doesn’t check IDs. He lets everyone into the club. Pretty soon the word gets around and stanols and sterols start lining up at the door. If a cholesterol molecule comes along, he gets discouraged by the line and doesn’t even try to get in. What the stanols and sterols don’t know is that there is a bouncer inside the club who does check IDs throws everyone who doesn’t belong there out the back door.

When you think about it, this is the best of all possible worlds. Cholesterol molecules don’t get into the bloodstream and neither do the stanols and sterols.

Alternatives to Statins: How Do Stanols and Sterols Lower Cholesterol?

As part of their Therapeutic Lifestyle Change Program the NIH recommends that people with elevated cholesterol consume 2 grams of plant stanols and sterols a day because over 80 clinical studies have proven that they work.

Two grams a day of stanols and sterols is sufficient to lower LDL cholesterol (the bad kind) by 9 to 13%. And many other clinical studies have shown that lowering LDL cholesterol by that much will lower your risk of a heart attack by 18-26%.

No wonder the NIH is so bullish on stanols and sterols!

Answers To The Questions You Didn’t Think To Ask

Here are answers to some questions that you haven’t even thought of yet:

#1: If 2 grams a day is good, would more be better?

No. Studies clearly show that 2 grams/day is optimal. Higher intakes do not lead to a significantly greater reduction in LDL cholesterol.

#2: Are there any side effects from consuming plant stanols & sterols on a daily basis?

No. That’s the great thing. Plant sterols and stanols are natural substances that we consume every day – and clinical studies have shown that they have no side effects.

#3: Is there some magical stanol/sterol combination that is more effective than others (as some supplement manufacturers would have you believe)?

No. Numerous studies have shown that stanols and sterols from many different sources have exactly the same effect and that it doesn’t matter whether they are esterified or not.

#4: Can I get 2 grams a day of stanols and sterols from my diet?

It’s unlikely. Even the best natural sources (usually fruits and vegetables) only have 5 to 40 mg per serving. If you are a vegetarian you can expect to get around 700 mg from your diet. If you consume a typical American diet you get around 250 mg and if you eat a lot of fast food you are probably getting less than 100 mg.

#5: I’ve noticed that food manufactures have started fortifying foods with stanols and/or sterols. Is this a good choice for me?

Not necessarily. You need to remember that Big Food Inc is not always your friend. To get 2 grams of stanols from Benecol you would need to consume 280 calories, 4 grams of saturated fat and 1.2 grams of trans fat. Two grams of stanols from Promise activ Super-Shot only costs you 70 calories, but it comes with artificial colors and 8 grams of sugar plus sucralose.

#6: When should I consume stanols and sterols if I want to maximize my LDL cholesterol reduction?

Any time from 30 minutes prior to your meal to with your meal is ideal – but the plant sterols and stanols will exert their beneficial effects for several hours so the time that you take the stanols & sterols is not critical.

#7: Are plant sterols and stanols a source of dietary fiber?

No. Plant stanols & sterols and dietary fiber work by different mechanisms – but they do complement each other in lowering LDL cholesterol. As a matter of fact, the NIH Therapeutic Lifestyle Program recommends 10-25 grams/day of soluble fiber along with the 2 grams/day of stanols and sterols. You should consider stanols/sterols and dietary fiber as a powerful one-two punch in your battle to lower your LDL cholesterol naturally.

#8: I’m already taking a statin drug. Is it OK to take plant stanols & sterols as well?

Absolutely. The NIH recommends that people using statin drugs also follow their Therapeutic Lifestyle Change Program – which includes 2 grams of plant stanols and sterols a day. In fact, because the effects of statins and plant sterols & stanols are additive, you may be able to reduce your dosage of statins or eliminate them entirely – which means less cost and less risk of side effects to you. [Note: You should partner with your physician in determining the dosage of statins to take.]

What I do not recommend is that you go off your statin drug and switch to a supplement containing stanols and sterols without consulting your doctor. Stanols and sterols have a more modest cholesterol lowering effect (and fewer side effects) than statin drugs. So if you were to just go off your statin and switch to a stanol/sterol supplement, your cholesterol levels might actually go up.

#9: Should I ask my doctor before taking plant stanols & sterols?

I always recommend that you keep your doctor informed about what you are doing. However, because the NIH recommends plant sterols and stanols for people with elevated cholesterol, your doctor is very likely to approve.

The Bottom Line

Plant stanols and sterols can be an important part of a holistic approach to lowering cholesterol naturally. In fact, the NIH recommends 2 grams/day of plant stanols and sterols as part of its Therapeutic Lifestyle Change Program for lowering cholesterol.

2 grams/day of plant stanols and sterols lowers LDL cholesterol (the bad kind) by an average of 9 to 13%, which is sufficient to decrease your heart attack risk by 18-26%.

Here are the answers to the most common questions I receive about stanols and sterols (for the full response read the article above)

2 grams of stanols & sterols a day is optimal. More is not better.

There are no side effects to adding stanols & sterols to your diet.

There is no “magical” sterol/stanol formulation. They all work about the same.

It is very unlikely that you can get 2 grams/day of stanols & sterols from your diet.

It is best to consume stanols & sterols before or with a meal, but the exact timing isn’t crucial.

Stanols & sterols are not the same as dietary fiber, but stanols/sterols and dietary fiber complement each other as part of a holistic approach to lower cholesterol.

It is OK to take stanols & sterols along with a statin drug. In fact, this is part of the approach recommended by the NIH Therapeutic Lifestyle Change Program. However, I do not recommend going off of a statin drug and substituting stanols & sterols without the permission of your doctor.

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.

Soy and Hot Flashes

August 4, 2015 by Dr. Steve Chaney

Will Soy Put Out The Fire?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

There has been a lot of controversy in recent years about soy and hot flashes. The question is whether soy isoflavones reduce the hot flashes associated with menopause.

And this is an important question! Because of concerns about increase heart attack risk with hormone replacement therapy (HRT) many women have been looking for natural alternatives to HRT for reducing hot flashes and other symptoms of menopause. They’ve been asking whether soy isoflavones are effective, and the answers that they’ve been getting have been confusing.

For example, you can still find many experts and health professionals who will tell you that soy isoflavones have no proven effect on menopause symptoms.

That is somewhat surprising since two recent meta-analyses (Howes et al, Maturitas, 55: 203-211, 2006; Williamson-Hughes, Menopause, 55: 203-211, 2006) and a 2010 expert panel of The North American Menopause Society have all concluded that soy isoflavones alleviate hot flashes.

Will Soy Put Out The Fire?

However, clear guidance in this area was sorely needed, so Taku et al (Menopause, DOI: 10.1097/gme.0b013e3182410159, 2012) performed an even larger meta-analysis that included 19 published clinical trials – some of which had been published after the previous two meta-analyses were performed.

I’ve talked about meta-analyses before, so you probably already know that they are very powerful because they combine the results of many individual clinical trials into a single data analysis.

But you also may remember me telling you that meta-analyses can be misleading if they introduce bias because of the kinds of clinical studies that they exclude from their analysis.

So I examined the design of this meta-analysis very carefully. It excluded clinical trials that:

were not double blind, placebo controlled and designed in such a manner that the placebo was indistinguishable from the soy isoflavone preparation.

contained other substances in addition to the soy isoflavones (The presence of other substances in the preparation might have influenced the response).

There were several other well justified reasons for excluding some studies from the meta-analysis, but they were technical in nature. In my opinion this was a very well designed study.

And the results were clear cut. An average of 54 mg of soy isoflavones (some studies used a little less, some a little more) was sufficient to reduce:

the frequency of hot flashes by 21% – and –
the severity of hot flashes by 26%

Soy and Hot Flashes: What This Study Mean For You?

The results of this study were highly statistically significant. So if you are suffering from hot flashes and are wondering whether soy isoflavones will put out the fire, the answer appears to be YES.

That’s the good news.

The bad news is that 21-26% is not a huge effect.

And, if you look at the individual clinical studies it is apparent that the response is highly variable. Some women experience major relief from hot flashes and other menopause symptoms, while other women experience little or no relief.

The reason for this variability is not known, but it is likely that the effectiveness of soy isoflavones on reducing hot flashes is modified by other components of the diet and by lifestyle factors such as obesity, exercise and stress.

Soy and hot flashes; the bottom line.

My take on this is that soy isoflavones should not be thought of as a “magic bullet” that will make hot flashes go away by themselves, but rather as a proven part of a holistic approach that encompasses a healthy diet, exercise, weight control and stress reduction

The Bottom Line

A recent meta-analysis of 19 published clinical studies showed that soy isoflavones reduced the frequency of hot flashes by 21% and the severity of hot flashes by 26%.

The results were highly statistically significant, but 21-26% reduction in symptoms is not a huge effect.

When they looked at the individual clinical studies it was apparent that the response is highly variable. Some women experienced major relief from hot flashes and other menopause symptoms, while other women experienced little or no relief.

My take on this is that soy isoflavones should not be thought of as a “magic bullet” that will make hot flashes go away by themselves, but rather as a proven part of a holistic approach that encompasses a healthy diet, exercise, weight control and stress reduction

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 Prevent Memory Loss?

July 28, 2015 by Dr. Steve Chaney

A New Study Shows B Vitamins and Omega-3s May Prevent Memory Loss

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

Want to know how to prevent memory loss? Every once in a while a breakthrough study comes along that has the potential to change paradigms. A recent study (Jerneren et al, Am J Clin Nutr, 102: 215-221, 2015) looking at the potential of B vitamins and omega-3s to slow brain shrinkage in the elderly is just such a study. It has the potential to forever change the way we think about preserving brain health as we age.

One of the most terrifying aspects of aging is the thought that we might literally lose our minds. On one hand, it seems to be an almost inevitable part of the aging process. Every year millions of older Americans develop mild cognitive impairment, and as they age many of them progress on to dementia or Alzheimer disease. In fact, one recent study (Plassman et al, Ann Neurol, 70: 418-426, 2014) estimated that for individuals 72 and older in the United States every 6 years:

8 million will develop mild cognitive impairment.
4 million will develop dementia.
3 million will develop Alzheimer disease.

Unfortunately, there is no effective drug treatment for preventing this cognitive decline, and there don’t appear to be any promising new drugs on the horizon. So it is only natural to ask whether there are diet and lifestyle changes that might reduce the rate of cognitive decline as we age.

As I discussed in previous issues of “Health Tips From the Professor” there are clinical studies suggesting that B vitamins and omega-3 fatty acids can both slow the brain shrinkage and cognitive decline associated with aging. Unfortunately, there are also clinical studies that have come up empty. They have found no effect of B vitamins or omega-3 fatty acids on brain shrinkage or cognitive decline. Because of these conflicting clinical results, many experts are simply not ready to endorse natural approaches for preventing cognitive decline.

That’s what makes the current study (Jerneren et al, Am J Clin Nutr, 102: 215-221, 2015) paradigm-changing. If this study is correct, you need both B vitamins and omega-3 fatty acids together to prevent cognitive decline. Neither one will work without the other.

That would explain a lot! The previous studies have not been designed to test the effects of both B vitamins and omega-3 fatty acids simultaneously. Whether or not the diets of previous study participants were adequate with respect to B vitamins and omega-3s was a matter of pure chance. If the diets were adequate in both B vitamins and omega-3s, the study outcome might be positive. If the diets were only adequate in just one or the other, the outcome would almost assuredly be negative.

Why Might B Vitamins and Omega-3s Both Be Required for Brain Health?

It is easy to understand why B vitamins and omega-3s each might be important for preventing cognitive decline individually. Cognitive decline is closely associated with elevated levels of homocysteine, a toxic amino acid metabolite, and multiple clinical studies have shown that the combination of folic acid, vitamin B12 and vitamin B6 is effective at lowering homocysteine levels.

The omega-3 fatty acids are an integral part of the myelin sheath that coats our neurons. You can think of myelin as being like the plastic coating on an electrical wire that allows the electrical current to travel from one end of the wire to the other without shorting out. Myelin plays essentially the same role for our neurons.

But what is the possible connection between B vitamins and omega-3s with regard to brain health? The authors of this study had an interesting hypothesis. It turns out that when homocysteine levels are elevated due to B vitamin deficiency methionine levels and the levels of a number of downstream metabolites, including phosphatidylcholine, are reduced – and phosphatidylcholine is what delivers omega-3 fatty acids to the brain.

If their hypothesis is correct, adequate levels of B vitamins are required to deliver omega-3 fatty acids to the brain. That means that omega-3 fatty acids would only be effective at preventing brain shrinkage and/or cognitive decline in studies where the subjects were receiving adequate B vitamins as well.

Conversely, if we assume, as the authors suggested, that the real role of B vitamins is to assure the presence of enough phosphatidylcholine to deliver omega-3 fatty acids to the brain, B vitamins would be effective only in clinical studies where the subjects were also getting sufficient omega-3s from their diet.

B Vitamins and Omega-3s Together May Be How To Prevent Memory Loss

The study itself included 168 adults over the age of 70 (average age = 77) with mild cognitive impairment at the beginning of the study. Half of them were given a high dose B vitamin supplement (800 ug folic acid, 500 ug vitamin B12, and 20 mg vitamin B6), and the other half were given a placebo.

Brain MRI scans were performed at the beginning of the study and again 2 years later to measure brain volume. Blood levels of omega-3 fatty acids were assessed at the beginning of the study. When the data were analyzed at the end of the study, the subjects with blood omega-3 levels of >590 umole/L were classified as having high omega-3 status, and subjects with blood omega-3 levels <390 umole/L were classified as having low omega-3 status.

The results were pretty striking:

B vitamin treatment reduced brain shrinkage by up to 70% over a two year period in adults over the age of 70.

The B vitamin treatment was only effective when the subjects were deficient in B vitamins at the beginning of the study, as indicated by elevated homocysteine levels.

The B vitamin treatment was also only effective in subjects with high omega-3 status. The B vitamin treatment had no benefit in subjects with low omega-3 status.

What Is The Significance Of This Study?

In today’s scientific world, “gold standard” clinical studies are considered to be those in which a single variable is evaluated in a double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Unfortunately, this reductionist approach can sometimes lead to misleading and confusing results.

For example, I once attended a session in which a world renowned expert was giving his talk on colon cancer. He said, “I can show you, unequivocally, that colon cancer risk is significantly decreased by a lifestyle that includes a high-fiber diet, a low-fat diet, adequate calcium, adequate B-vitamins, exercise and weight control. But I can’t show you that any one of them, by themselves, is effective.”

The question that came to me as I heard him speak was: “What’s the message that a responsible scientist or responsible health professional should be giving to their patients or the people that they’re advising?” You’ve heard experts saying: “Don’t worry about the fat” “Don’t worry about calcium.” “Don’t worry about B-vitamins.” “Don’t worry about fiber.” “None of them can be shown to decrease the risk of colon cancer.” Is that the message that we should be giving people? Or should we really be saying what that doctor said many years ago – that a lifestyle that includes all of those things significantly decreases the risk of colon cancer?

Similarly, in a recent “Health Tips From the Professor” I shared a study, Alzheimers Hope, showing that a holistic program involving exercise, a healthy diet, socialization and memory training significantly reduced cognitive decline in the elderly. Once again, it has been very difficult to reproducibly show that any of those interventions individually prevent cognitive decline.

That is what makes the current study so exciting. It is a single study, and it is a relatively small study. It definitely needs to be repeated. However, it has the potential to be a paradigm-shifting study.

Previous studies looking at the effect of B vitamins and omega-3s on brain shrinkage and/or cognitive decline have been inconsistent. Many have shown a benefit, but some have not. But, until now, none of the studies have looked at B vitamins and omega-3s together. If this study is correct, all future studies should examine the effect of both B vitamins and omega-3s together. The paradigm will have been forever changed.

Does It Matter?

The important question is whether this is just an academic discussion or does it really matter? If most older adults were getting adequate amounts of omega-3s and B vitamins in their diet, this would merely be an academic discussion. Unfortunately, that is not the case.

Our oceans and rivers are becoming more and more polluted, and many people are avoiding fish because of concerns about heavy metal or PCB contamination. There is also an increasing emphasis on eating “sustainable” fish. That usually means the fish are farm raised, and farm raised fish are the most likely to be contaminated with PCBs, which is unfortunate. For example, I recently went to a nice restaurant that had a delicious sounding salmon dish on their menu. They could guarantee that the salmon was sustainably raised, but they couldn’t guarantee it was PCB-free. I chose not to eat the salmon.

It is no wonder that many adults aren’t getting enough omega-3s in their diet. In a recent “Health Tips From the Professor,” Do women get enough omeg-3 during pregnancy I reported a study showing that a shocking 75% of pregnant and lactating Canadian women were not getting enough omega-3s in their diet! Other studies suggest those of us in the United States don’t do much better.

We don’t do much better with respect to B vitamins either. For example:

The most frequent cause of B12 deficiency is the age related loss of the ability to absorb vitamin B12 in the upper intestine. This affects 10-30% of people over the age of 50.

Chronic use of acid-suppressing medications such as Prilosec, Nexium, Tagamet, Pepcid and Zantac also decreases B12 absorption and increases the risk of B12 deficiency. Millions of Americans use those drugs on a daily basis.

Overall, B12 deficiency has been estimated to affect about 40% of people over 60 years of age.

Deficiency of the enzyme methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) substantially increases the requirement for folic acid. About 10% of the US population has this enzyme deficiency.

About 25% of Americans have low blood levels of B6

Clearly, this is not just an academic argument. Millions of older Americans are deficient in B vitamins or omega-3s or both.

The Bottom Line

A recently published study looked at the effect of high dose B vitamin supplementation on brain shrinkage over a two year periods in adults over 70 (average age 77) with mild cognitive impairment at the beginning of the study. This study differed from all previous studies in that it also measured omega-3 fatty acid levels in the blood at the beginning of the study to assess omega-3 status.

B vitamin treatment reduced brain shrinkage by up to 70% over the two year period compared to placebo.

The B vitamin treatment was only effective when the subjects were deficient in B vitamins at the beginning of the study, as indicated by elevated homocysteine levels.

The B vitamin treatment was also only effective in subjects with high omega-3 status at the beginning of the study. If they had low omega-3 status, the B vitamin supplementation was ineffective.

This study has the potential to forever shift the paradigm for preventing cognitive decline in the elderly. Past studies have looked at the effect of B vitamins and omega-3s at reducing cognitive decline separately, and these studies have been inconsistent. If this study is correct, consistent benefits will only be seen when both B vitamins and omega-3 fatty acids are present at adequate levels.

This is a concern because millions of older Americans are deficient in B vitamins or omega-3s or both.

How to prevent memory loss? Of course, B vitamins and omega-3s are just part of a holistic approach for preventing cognitive decline. Weight control, exercise, a healthy diet, adequate sleep, socialization, and memory training (mental exercise) are also important if we want to retail our full mental capacity into our 90s and beyond.

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.

Hamstring Stretches

July 21, 2015 by Dr. Steve Chaney

What To Do For Tight Hamstrings

Author: Julie Donnelly, LMT –The Pain Relief Expert

Editor: Dr. Steve Chaney

You are about to begin your run, or maybe you have just finished running. Your hamstring feels really tight. Maybe it is even painful. It seems obvious that you need to stretch it, but that could be exactly the wrong thing to do!

You Need To Release Muscle Fiber Knots Before You Do Hamstring Stretches!

Stretching can be dangerous if the muscle is shortened by spasms. A spasm (also called a muscle knot or trigger point) is like tying a knot in the center of the muscle. And while each spasm may only involve a few fibers; there can be multiple spasms throughout the muscle.

Each spasm feels like a bump when you slide your fingers deeply down the length of the muscle. These spasms normally form over an extended period of time, often from repetitive strain on the muscle fibers.

Muscle Spasms Are At The Heart of the Stretching Misconception

It is important that you think of a spasm as a knot in the muscle fibers in order to understand why it can hurt to stretch.

A muscle begins on a stationary bone, crosses over a joint, and then inserts into a moveable bone. When the muscle pulls on the moveable bone, the joint moves, however, if the muscle has a “knot” in it you can cause micro-tears to the fibers as you stretch.

As you stretch, knots within the muscle get tighter, this also causes the fibers on either side of the spasm to overstretch. Overstretching can cause fiber tears either along the length of the muscle or where the fibers attach to the bone. In most cases this can be avoided by simply applying pressure to the muscle to release the spasm before you stretch.

What Do Hamstrings Do?

Your hamstrings are responsible for bending your knee. Every time you take a step, sit down, or climb stairs, you contract your hamstrings.

The only time your hamstrings aren’t contracting is when you are standing up straight. This means they are frequently repetitively strained and contain multiple spasms along the muscle fibers. These tight muscles put a strain on the back of your knee and at the origination point (the bottom of your posterior pelvis).

What Causes Tight Hamstrings?

The hamstrings are a bit unique from other muscles because while they can certainly have spasms in the fibers from repetitive strain injuries, they are also overstretched because of two major muscles that rotate the pelvis down in the front.

The two muscles that cause tight muscles to be overstretched are the iliopsoas (a muscle on the front side of the lumbar vertebrae) and the quadriceps (front of the thigh).

As these muscles get tight, primarily from sitting, they cause the pelvis to rotate forward and down. As your pelvis rotates down in the front, it rotates up in the back.

Since your hamstrings originate on the bottom of the posterior pelvis, as it is moving up, the muscle fibers are already overstretched – so you don’t need to stretch them further. In fact, if you stretch them they could potentially tear.

What Should You Do Before Your Hamstring Stretches?

It’s actually a 3-step process. The key is to release tension in the front of the body before you can safely stretch the hamstrings.

First you need to release the tension in your quadriceps, this will take the tension off the front of the pelvis. You do this by rolling out your quadriceps muscles which releases trigger points (muscle spasms).

Next, stretch your iliopsoas. A low lunge is a great way to stretch the iliopsoas. This causes the pelvis to rotate up in the front and down in the back. As that happens tension is removed from the hamstrings.

Now you can release the spasms in the hamstrings. You do this by sitting on a trigger point therapy ball, ironing out your hamstrings. Stay on specific points of pain; these are the knots in the muscle fibers you need to release. The direct pressure forces out the toxins, draws in blood and causes muscle fibers to lengthen.

Releasing muscle knots in your quadriceps, stretching your iliopsoas and releasing muscle knots in your hamstrings MUST be done before you can safely perform your hamstring stretches.

Do yourself a big favor and take these short steps; you will notice a difference!

Wishing you well,

Julie Donnelly

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.

About The Author

Do Statins Cause Memory Loss?

July 14, 2015 by Dr. Steve Chaney

Is the Cure Worse Than the Disease?

Author: Dr. Steve Chaney

Do statins cause memory loss? They are at it again. The medical profession is telling us that yet another study shows that statins are safe, so almost everyone should be taking a statin drug. There is only one problem. That’s not what the study really showed.

Let’s start at the beginning. For people who have already had a heart attack it is pretty clear that statin drugs save lives. If stain drugs were only prescribed for people who have had a heart attack or were at high risk of having a heart attack, I would be a proponent of their use.

However, the guidelines developed by the pharmaceutical and medical industry recommend statin use for millions of Americans who have never had a heart attack and who are at low to moderate risk of ever having a heart attack. That is problematic.

As I documented in a recent “Health Tips From the Professor” the benefits of statins are marginal at best in healthy people who have not yet had a heart attack.

In addition, statins have some significant side effects. For example, up to 5% of people taking statins develop muscle pain and weakness. For most people the muscle pain is merely an inconvenience, but in a small percentage of cases it can lead to serious complications.

More concerning are the required label warnings that statins can lead to memory loss, mental confusion, high blood sugar and type 2 diabetes. In fact, a recent study described in “Health Tips From the Professor” suggests that statins may increase diabetes risk by as much as 46%.

In other words, statins may not kill you, but they sure can make life miserable. For many people, the most troubling aspect of statin use is memory loss. One of the most terrifying aspects of aging is the thought that you might be able to keep your body healthy but lose your mind.

However, recent headlines have proclaimed that we can “forget” about statins causing memory loss (Pardon the pun. I couldn’t resist it). They claim that a recent study has shown that statins don’t actually cause memory loss. The problem is that is not exactly what the study showed. It is only the medical profession’s interpretation of what the study showed.

Why Might Statins Cause Memory Loss?

Statin drugs block cholesterol synthesis, and cholesterol is an integral part of the myelin sheath that coats our neurons. You can think of myelin as being like the plastic coating on an electrical wire. It is that plastic coating that allows the electrical current to travel from one end of the wire to the other without shorting out. Myelin plays essentially the same role for our neurons.

Because of the importance of cholesterol in maintaining the integrity of myelin, there was concern from the earliest days of statin development that it might adversely affect memory. Thus, multiple clinical studies have been performed to determine whether statin use adversely affects memory.

Unfortunately, the previous clinical studies have been inclusive. Some suggested that statins cause memory loss. Others found no correlation between statin use and memory loss. A few actually suggested that statins improved memory. There are a number of reasons why the previous studies came to different conclusions including use of different statin drugs, different duration of the studies, and differences in how memory was measured.

Do Statins Cause Memory Loss?

This study (Strom et al, JAMA Internal Medicine, doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.2092) differed from previous studies in that:

It focused on short term memory loss, and

It also included a group of patients who were using non-statin cholesterol lowering drugs.

The study drew on patient data from the online Health Improvement Network database collected from general practitioners offices throughout England between July 7, 2013 and January 15, 2015. The study compared 482,543 statin users with 482,543 matched controls using no cholesterol lowering medication and 26,484 patients using non-statin cholesterol lowering medications. The average age of the participants in this study was 63. Memory loss within the first 30 days after initiation of drug therapy was assessed by scanning the medical records in the database for codes related to memory loss.

The results were stunning!

Stain drug users were 4-fold more likely to experience short term memory loss within the first 30 days than non-users, and the likelihood of memory loss was dose dependent.

The users of non-statin cholesterol lowering drugs were also 4-fold more likely to experience short term memory loss within the first 30 days than non-users.

As you might expect there was no significant difference in memory loss between users of the statin and non-statin cholesterol lowering drugs.

How Were The Results Interpreted?

The results seemed to be pretty clear cut, but it was a somewhat misleading interpretation of the results that was widely publicized. The authors of the article correctly pointed out that there are two possible interpretations of these results. Either…

All cholesterol lowering drugs cause acute memory loss….or

The association of memory loss with cholesterol lowering drugs is the result of something called “detection bias”.

Let me explain. Some memory loss is fairly common for people in their 60s and beyond. The term “detection bias” simply means that the patients might have been more acutely aware of memory loss because they were monitoring themselves for side effects to the drug they just started taking.

Of course, the medical profession is so confident in the benefits of statins that they focused on the second interpretation, and that is the one that you heard about in all of the press releases about this study. If you believe that the self-reported memory loss in this study was entirely due to detection bias, then the most logical interpretation of the study is that statin drugs really don’t cause memory loss.

However, I consider the first interpretation to be the most likely of the two. If use of cholesterol lowering drugs were associated with a 25% or 50% increase in memory loss, detection bias could have been a credible interpretation of the data. However, a 4-fold increase in memory loss is hard to ascribe to detection bias alone.

Furthermore, the first explanation is fully consistent with what we know about myelin. Because of the importance of cholesterol in maintaining the integrity of the myelin sheath, it is logical that any drug that dramatically lowers cholesterol levels could have an adverse effect on cognitive function.

Are There Other Options Besides Statin Drugs?

Because of the marginal benefits in healthy people and the multiple side effects, some experts are starting to step up and say that statins may be overprescribed. For example, Dr. Roger Blumenthal, MD, a professor and director of the Ciccarone Preventive Cardiology Center at Johns Hopkins recently said: “Statin therapy should not be approached like diet and exercise as a broadly based solution for preventing coronary heart disease. These are lifelong medications with potential, although rare, side effects, and physicians should only consider their use for those patients at greatest risk…”

So, what are the alternatives?

#1: Lower Cholesterol Naturally With Some TLC

The National Heart Lung & Blood Institute recommends that something called Therapeutic Lifestyle Change or TLC should always be tried first for patients with elevated cholesterol, and that statins only be used if the lifestyle approach fails – a message that seems to have gotten lost in the translation in many doctor’s offices. The TLC recommendations are:

Add 2 grams per day of plant stanols and sterols to your diet. In most cases some that will require some degree of supplementation.
Eat less than 7 percent of your daily calories from saturated fat
Eat less than 200 mg a day of cholesterol
Make sure that you get 10-25 grams per day of soluble fiber.
Get only 25–35 percent of daily calories from total fat (this includes saturated fat calories)
Consume only enough calories to reach or maintain a healthy weight
In addition, you should get at least 30 minutes of a moderate intensity physical activity, such as brisk walking, on most, and preferably all, days of the week.

There is ample evidence that implementation of these lifestyle changes will reduce cholesterol levels and reduce the risk of heart attack and stroke without any side effects. The reduction in cholesterol levels is more modest than what can be achieved with cholesterol lowering medications, but perhaps that is the point. Perhaps the medical profession is being too aggressive in reducing cholesterol levels with drug therapy.

If you are a bit overwhelmed by the TLC recommendations, there is good news. Even one or two of the lifestyle changes mentioned above can substantially reduce your risk of heart attack or stroke. For example, in a previous “Health Tips From the Professor,” apple a day keeps statins away, I reported on a study claiming that simply eating one apple a day would be just as effective as statins at reducing cardiovascular deaths.

#2: Reduce Other Risk Factors Associated with Heart Disease

Elevated cholesterol is not the only risk factor associated with heart disease. In fact, many experts feel that it isn’t even the most important risk factor. High blood pressure, high triglycerides, inflammation and damage to the endothelial lining of our arteries are other important risk factors for heart disease. If you are leery about using statins to reduce your cholesterol levels, you might want to explore other natural approaches to reducing heart disease risk. For example:

Omega-3s reduce triglyceride levels, blood pressure and inflammation. As I have reported previously (https://www.chaneyhealth.com/healthtips/fish-oil-really-snake-oil/), some studies suggest that they are as effective as statins at reducing heart attack risk

Nitrate from foods such as beetroot and spinach reduce blood pressure and improve endothelial health. This is also a topic I have covered in a previous “Health Tips From the Professor” Nitric Oxide Benefits Side Effects.

Resveratrol and related polyphenols reduce inflammation and improve endothelial health.

I could go on, but you get the point. There are other natural approaches for reducing heart attack risk. Statins and other cholesterol lowering drugs are not the only game in town.

Red Yeast Rice Yeast Rice Side Effects?

However, just because a supplement is natural doesn’t necessarily mean that it is either safe or effective. Red yeast rice is a perfect example. Many people think of red yeast rice as a natural way to reduce cholesterol levels. They believe red yeast rice side effects are non-existent. Nothing could be further from the truth!

The active ingredients in red yeast rice are a class of compounds called monacolins, which are close analogs of the statin drugs. In fact, the most abundant monacolin, monacolin K, is identical to the statin drug lovastatin.

That destroys one myth. If a red yeast rice product contains as much monacolin K as a lovastatin pill, it would have the same benefits and the same side effects.

It only gets worse! In fact, you have no way of knowing how much monacolin K is in your red yeast rice supplement. Because lovastatin is a drug the manufacturers are caught in a Catch-22 situation. If the manufacturers were to actually standardize or disclose the levels of monacolin K in their product, the FDA would consider it an unapproved drug.

When manufacturers don’t standardize their active ingredients bad things happen. How bad, you might ask? A recent study analyzed the concentration of active ingredients in 12 commercially available red yeast rice supplements (R. Y. Gordon et al, Archives of Internal Medicine, 170: 1722-1727, 2015). The results were appalling:

Total monacolins in the supplements ranged from 0.31 to 11.15 mg/capsule.

Monacolin K (lovastatin) ranged from 0.10 to 10.09 mg/capsule.

To put that into perspective therapeutic doses of lovastatin range from 10 to 80 mg/day.

It gets even worse! The study also measured levels of a toxin called citrinin that is produced by a fungus and is potentially toxic to the kidneys. This is not a toxin that you would find in a pharmaceutical product like lovastatin, but it was present in high levels in one third of the red yeast rice formulations tested.

To sum it all up, if you were to go out and purchase a red yeast rice supplement.

You might get a batch with no active ingredients. It wouldn’t have any of the side effects of a statin drug, but it wouldn’t have any efficacy either.

You might get a batch that would have the same efficacy and the same side effects as a low dose statin drug.

You would have a 33% chance of getting a batch that was contaminated with a toxin that you would never find in a statin drug.

I don’t know about you, but after reading that study I have no desire to ever try a red yeast rice supplement.

Do statins cause memory loss?

The Bottom Line

For people who have already had a heart attack statin drugs are clearly beneficial. They save lives.

If you haven’t already had a heart attack and your doctor prescribes a statin, you may want to have a serious discussion with your doctor about alternative approaches for reducing heart attack risk. You may even want to seek a second opinion from a doctor with a more holistic orientation. Recent research suggests that statin drugs:

Are of marginal efficacy in low to moderate risk individuals who have not suffered a heart attack.

Can cause muscle pain and weakness, which can lead to serious illness in a small percentage of the cases.

May increase the risk of developing type 2 diabetes by up to 46%.

May cause memory loss and mental confusion.

A recent study showed that both statin and non-statin cholesterol lowering drugs caused 4-fold greater short term memory loss in older adults compared to matched patients who were not taking statin medications.

The medical profession has chosen to interpret this study as showing that statin drugs don’t cause short term memory loss, and that is the interpretation that has been widely reported in the press. I feel that the more logical interpretation of the data is that both statin and non-statin cholesterol lowering drugs cause short term memory loss.

Fortunately, there are natural approaches for reducing cholesterol levels and heart disease risk without any side effects. For example, the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute recommends a natural approach called Therapeutic Lifestyle Change or TLC .

There are also natural approaches for reducing other risk factors for heart disease such as high blood pressure, high triglycerides, and inflammation. These include things like omega-3 fatty acids, nitrate from vegetables like beetroots and spinach, and polyphenols like resveratrol just to name a few.

However, natural is not always better. Red yeast rice, for example, is neither safe nor effective. For more 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.

Iron and Brain Development

July 7, 2015 by Dr. Steve Chaney

Iron and the Teen Brain
Author: Dr. Steve Chaney

For those of you with teenagers – or who have had teenagers in the past – you may suspect that there’s nothing between their ears. But actually there is a lot going on between their ears, and some of the neural contacts laid down in the brain during the teen years influence the health of their brain during their adult life. Let’s look at the association between iron and brain development.

And – no surprise here – what they eat can affect the health of their brain as well.

Which brings me to a study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences January 9, 2012 (doi: 10.1073/pnas.1105543109) that looks at the adequacy of dietary iron intake during the teenage years and their brain health as adults.

Basics of Iron Metabolism

Before I describe the study perhaps a little bit of what I call Biochemistry 101 is in order.

Free iron is toxic to living cells. For that reason, our body produces multiple proteins to bind and transport the iron. The protein that binds and transports iron through the bloodstream is called transferrin. Under normal conditions 2/3 of the transferrin in our bloodstream has iron bound to it and 1/3 does not. And that is the ideal ratio of bound and unbound transferrin for delivery of iron to brain cells and other cells in our body.

When our diet is iron deficient (or we have excessive blood loss) the percent iron saturation of transferring decreases. The body tries to compensate by producing more transferrin, but this doesn’t really help since the problem was inadequate iron supply, not inadequate transferrin supply. As a consequence elevated transferrin levels are generally indicative of an iron-deficient diet.

Iron and Brain Development in Teens

The study was led by Dr. Paul Thompson of the UCLA Department of Neurology. He and his team performed brain scans on 631 healthy young adults with an average age of 23. The brain scans were of a type that measured strength and integrity of the connections between the nerves in the brain – in other words, the brain’s wiring. They then went back and looked at the amount of iron available to each subject’s brain during adolescence by looking at their blood transferrin levels from routine physical exams performed at ages 12, 14 and 16 (blood transferrin levels are often measured as part of routine physical exams).

The results were pretty clear cut. Elevated transferrin levels during the teenage years were associated with reduced brain-fiber integrity in regions of the brain that are known to be vulnerable to neurodegeneration. These individuals did not show any cognitive impairments as young adults, but the concern is that they might be more likely to develop cognitive impairments as they age.

Dr. Thompson summarized his team’s findings by saying that “Poor iron levels in childhood erode your brain reserves which you need later in life to protect against aging and Alzheimer’s. This is remarkable, as we were not studying iron deficient people, just around 600 normal healthy people. It underscores the need for a balanced diet in the teenage years, when your brain command center is still actively maturing.”

Questions Every Parent Should Ask

If you have teenagers you might want to ask yourself questions like:

What is your teenager’s diet like?

Is it balanced?

Are you sure that it meets their nutritional needs?

Should you consider supplementation to make sure that they are getting all of the nutrients that they need?

The Bottom Line

A recent study suggested that inadequate iron intake in the teenage years may affect how our brains are wired in our adult years. The authors of the study interpreted the study as suggesting that an inadequate diet during the teen years could predispose us to cognitive decline and Alzheimer’s as adults.

This study only looked at structural differences in the brain circuitry. We can’t conclude from this study alone that inadequate iron intake as a teenager will doom somebody to cognitive impairment and increased Alzheimer’s risk as they age. But we can conclude that adequate iron intake during adolescence is required for normal brain development.

And it’s probably not just iron. This study focused on iron status because transferrin levels are routinely measured during physical exams so it was easy to go back and determine what each subject’s iron status was during their teenage years. Many other important nutrients are required for normal brain development, but we don’t have an easy way of going back and determining what someone’s nutritional status was for those nutrients in their teen years. What was shown to be true for iron in this study is likely to be true for other nutrients as well.

These were normal teens eating a normal American diet. They weren’t from a third world country and there was nothing weird about what they were eating. But, clearly some of the subjects in the study weren’t getting the iron that they needed from diet alone.

The teen years are a time of rapid growth and maturation. It’s not just the brain that needs the proper balance of nutrients during the teen years. All of their tissues require proper nutrition.

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

Are All Calories Created Equal?

June 30, 2015 by Dr. Steve Chaney

Are Food Choices More Important Than Calories?Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

Most adult Americans gain a pound or two each year. That may not sound like much on a yearly basis, but over a lifetime it is huge – if you’ll pardon the pun.

Because the health consequences of weight gain are so devastating, everyone has their favorite dietary advice for keeping those extra pounds away. For some it is diet plans – low fat, low carb, paleo, Mediterranean – you name it. For others it is counting calories or avoiding sugars of all kinds. The list goes on. Are all calories created equal?

But what if all of these approaches were wrong? What if we could keep our weight under control solely based on the foods we eat? A recent study seemed to suggest that we just might.

How Was The Study Designed?

A group of scientists from Tufts University and Harvard decided to look at how the food choices we make on a daily basis influence our weight gain or loss over time (Smith et al, AJCN 101: 1216-1224, 2015). However, they designed their study in a very unique way, and it is important that I explain the study design so that you can understand the strengths and limitations of the study.

Most studies of this kind look at what foods people are eating and compare that to how much they weigh. These scientists looked at changes that people made in their diets and correlated that with how much weight they gained or lost over time.

When you think of it, that’s the information most of us really want to know. We are less interested in why the foods we used to eat got us into trouble in the first place than we are in how the changes we make in our diet might influence future weight loss or gain.

This study combined the data from three very large, long term studies – the Nurses’ Health Study, the Nurses’ Health Study II, and the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study. Altogether that is a group of 120,784 men and women who were followed for 16-24 years. All three of these studies measured weight and evaluated dietary habits using food-frequency questionnaires every 4 years.

The scientists conducting the study measured changes in food choices and changes in weight for each individual in 4-year increment over the total time duration of the studies. In analyzing the data, they looked at choices of protein foods, total carbohydrate, and the glycemic load (GL) of the carbohydrates.

Glycemic load is the glycemic index (effect on blood sugar) of the carbohydrates in a particular food times the total amount of carbohydrate in that food. You can think of glycemic load as a measure of carbohydrate quality. For example, white bread, pastries, muffins, pancakes, white rice, chocolates, candy bars, cookies, brownies, cakes, pies, and pretzels would all be examples of foods with a high glycemic load. Fruits, whole grain foods and starchy vegetables would be examples of foods with a moderate glycemic load. Vegetables and beans would be examples of foods that generally have a low glycemic load.

The authors of the study did not measure calories or fat intake for this study, but those factors are indirectly included in food choices – more about that later.

Are All Calories Created Equal?

Now let’s get to the good stuff – the results of this study. When the authors analyzed the data they found that:

Most of the subjects did not exchange one protein food for another over the course of the study. They exchanged protein foods for carbohydrate-rich foods and vice versa.

This was a surprise. Since many experts have been recommending that people substitute chicken and fish for red meat, they had expected to see that kind of dietary shift when they analyzed the data. Apparently, people have not been listening to the experts!

When the subjects replaced a serving of carbohydrate-rich foods with a serving of red meats, processed meats, chicken with skin or most cheeses they gained between 0.5 to 2.3 pounds per year. Within this category the greatest weight gain was seen when hamburgers were substituted for carbohydrates, and the least weight gain was seen when cheese was substituted for carbohydrates.

When the subjects replaced a serving of carbohydrate-rich foods with a serving of milk, peanuts or eggs there was no net change in weight. These appear to be substitutions that are good for weight maintenance.

When the subjects replaced a serving of carbohydrate-rich foods with a serving of yoghurt, peanut butter, beans, walnuts, other nuts, chicken without skin, low-fat cheese or seafood they lost between 0.5 and 1.5 pounds/year. Within this category the greatest weight loss was seen when plain yoghurt was substituted for carbohydrates, and the least weight loss was seen when low-fat cheese was substituted for carbohydrates.

When they focused on carbohydrate-rich foods, replacing one serving of high glycemic load foods with low glycemic load foods was associated with one pound of weight loss per year. Simply put, if you switch from cookies, pastries and candies to fruits and vegetables, you are likely to lose weight. No surprise here.

The study really got interesting when they looked at the effect of adding different proteins in the context of the carbohydrate-rich foods that the subjects were eating. For example,

When the subjects added a serving of red meat to a diet containing carbohydrate foods with a high glycemic load, they gained an average of 2.5 pounds per year. When they added that same serving of red meat to a diet containing carbohydrate foods with a low glycemic index, they gained only around 1.5 pounds per year.

Simply put, that means eating a hamburger on a white flour bun with fries is going to pack on more pounds than a hamburger patty with brown rice and a green salad.

The effect of glycemic load was particularly interesting when you looked at the protein foods that were good for weight maintenance overall. For example, adding a serving of eggs to a high glycemic load diet resulted in a 0.6 pound/year weight gain, while adding that same serving of eggs to a low glycemic load diet resulted in a 1.75 pound/year weight loss. The results were similar for cheeses.

Finally, glycemic load also influenced the effectiveness of protein foods associated with weight loss. For example, addition of a serving of beans to a high glycemic load diet resulted in 0.5 pound/year weight gain loss, but adding a serving of beans to a low glycemic load diet resulted in a 1.5 pound/year weight loss.

New Insights From This Study

This study broke new ground in several areas. For example,

We have heard over and over that substituting beans, chicken and fish for red meats is healthier. This is the first study I have heard of that says those same substitutions can prevent or reverse weight gain.

Many people advocate a high protein diet for weight control or weight loss, but many of them will tell you the type of protein doesn’t matter. This study suggests that the type of protein foods we eat are important in determining whether we lose or gain weight.

Everyone knows that switching from white grains, pastries and candy to whole grains, fruits and vegetables will help you lose weight, but this is the first study I’m aware of that suggests those same changes will influence whether the protein foods we eat lead to weight gain or weight loss.

Many people focus on fats and calories when trying to avoid weight gain. While this study is not really fat and calorie neutral (see below), it does suggest that if we focus on eating healthy foods we don’t need to be counting every fat gram and every calorie.

Finally, this study suggests that if we forget all of those crazy diets and focus on eating healthy foods, our weight will take care of itself. Not exactly a novel concept, but one worth repeating.

Limitations of the Study

The head author of this study stated in an interview “The idea that the human body is just a bucket for calories is too simplistic. It’s not just a matter of thinking about calories or fat. What’s the quality of the foods we are eating? And how do we define quality.” This has been picked up by the media with statements like “not all calories are created equal”.

That is a bit of a hyperbole, because this study is not really fat and calorie neutral. The protein foods (red and processed meats) that pack on the most calories are higher in fat and calories per serving than those protein foods (skinless chicken, fish and beans) that cause the least weight gain. Similarly, the carbohydrate foods with the highest glycemic load (pastries, cakes and candy) are higher in fat and calories per serving than those carbohydrate foods with the lowest glycemic load (fruits and vegetables).

The real message is not that fat content and calories don’t count. Nor is it that calories in some foods count more than the same calories in other foods. The take home lesson from this study should be that we don’t have to focus on fat and calories. If we focus on healthy foods, the fat and calories tend to take care of themselves.

But, even that message is a bit too simplistic. Choosing healthy foods is not all that there is for weight control. We also need consider:

Portion sizes. Half a chicken could easily add more calories than a small hamburger.

How the food is cooked. Fish cooked in a cream sauce may not be any better for weight control than a slab of red meat.

Exercise. We need to maintain muscle mass to keep metabolic rate high.

The Bottom Line

A recent study has broken new ground and provided some new insights into how to prevent those extra pounds from sneaking up on us over time. This study evaluated how some simple changes we could make in the foods we eat can influence whether we gain or lose weight.

One part of the study looked at the effects of replacing a serving of carbohydrate rich foods with a serving of protein rich foods. If that protein rich food were a hamburger, we could expect to gain about 2.3 pounds/year. If that protein rich food were seafood, we could expect to lose about 1.5 pounds/year. Other protein foods fall in between those extremes. The specifics are covered above.

This a new insight. Many people advocate a high protein diet for weight control or weight loss, but many of them will tell you the type of protein doesn’t matter. So, are all calories created equal? This study suggests that the type of protein foods we eat are important in determining whether we lose or gain weight.

Another part of the study looked at the effect of different carbohydrate foods based on their glycemic load (the effect they have on blood sugar). Simply replacing 1 serving of high glycemic load foods (refined grain foods, cookies, cakes, candy) with low glycemic load foods (whole grains, fruits and vegetables) was associated with a one pound/year weight loss. This should surprise no one.

Finally, one part of the study looked at the influence of glycemic load on the effect that various proteins have on weight gain or loss. For example, adding a serving of eggs to a high glycemic load diet resulted in a 0.6 pound/year weight gain, while adding that same serving of eggs to a low glycemic load diet resulted in a 1.75 pound/year weight loss. Other examples are given above.

This is also a new insight. Everyone knows that switching from white grains, pastries and candy to whole grains, fruits and vegetables will help you lose weight, but this is the first study I’m aware of that suggests those same changes will influence whether the protein foods we eat lead to weight gain or weight loss.

Some in the media have interpreted this study as saying that fat and calories don’t count. However, this study was not really fat and calorie neutral. The protein and carbohydrate rich foods that packed on the most calories were also the foods highest in fat and calories. The real take home message from this study is that we may not need to focus so much on fat and calories. When we focus on eating healthy foods the fat and calories tend to take care of themselves.

Even that message is a bit too simplistic. It is not enough to just focus on healthy foods. We need to consider things like portion size, how the food is prepared, and our exercise habits among other things.

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.

Do Omega-3s Prevent Age-Related Muscle Loss?

June 23, 2015 by Dr. Steve Chaney

Does Fish Oil Build Muscle?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

Omega-3-rich fish oil supplements have attracted their share of controversy in recent years, but there appear to be lots of reasons to make sure that you get enough omega-3s from your diet.

There is actually pretty good evidence that omega-3s offer a natural approach for people who wish to lower their blood pressure (https://www.chaneyhealth.com/healthtips/do-omega-3s-lower-blood-pressure/) or heart attack risk (https://www.chaneyhealth.com/healthtips/fish-oil-really-snake-oil/). There is also some evidence that omega-3s may be important for brain development in infants (J Protzko et al, Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8: 25-40, 2013), for mental performance in children (https://www.chaneyhealth.com/healthtips/omega-3s-improve-reading-skills/) and for preventing cognitive decline in the elderly (https://www.chaneyhealth.com/healthtips/omega-3s-slow-cognitive-decline/).

If the latest headlines are to be believed, we can add preventing age-related muscle loss to the benefits of an omega-3-rich diet.

Why Is Age-Related Loss of Muscle Mass a Problem?

The term for age-related muscle loss is sarcopenia, and it is a big problem for older adults. After age 50 we lose 1-2% of our muscle mass each year. As you might expect, our strength declines as well. Each 1% loss of muscle mass translates into about 1.5% loss in strength. That means after age 50 we lose 1.5% of our muscle strength each year, and once we hit 60 the rate of loss increases to around 3% per year.

That may not sound like much on an annual basis, but it adds up over time. With a little bit of higher math you can calculate that you could easily have lost 45% of your muscle strength by the age of 70 and a whopping 75% by the age of 80. At that point even the simplest physical activities – lifting a grandchild or a bag of groceries – can become challenging. That loss of strength also contributes to a loss of balance that can lead to debilitating falls.

The most effective way of preventing age-related muscle loss is regular resistance training, especially when coupled with adequate intake of protein and leucine (https://www.chaneyhealth.com/healthtips/protein-needs-for-older-adults/). However, resistance training is hard work, so many older adults gravitate to quick fixes like testosterone, growth hormone, or DHEA – even though each of those treatment regimens have significant side effects and risks.

That’s why the recent headlines suggesting that a risk-free approach like omega-3 supplementation might increase muscle mass and strength in older adults is so enticing.

Do Omega-3s Prevent Age-Related Muscle Loss?

A previous study had suggested that omega-3 supplementation enhanced the effect of strength training in elderly women (Rodacki et al, AJCN, 95: 428-436, 2012). Although the mechanism of that effect is unclear, the authors of this study decided to go one step further. They asked if omega-3 fatty acids might prevent loss of muscle mass even in the elderly in the absence of a structured exercise program (Smith et al, AJCN, doi: 10.3945/ajcn.114.105833, 2015).

The study consisted of 44 men and women age 60-85 (average age 69) who were not exercising on a regular basis. They were given either 4 gm of fish oil (containing 1.86 gm of EPA and 1.5 gm of DHA) or a placebo containing corn oil each day for 6 months. Muscle mass and four measures of muscle strength were performed at the beginning of the study and again at 6 months. The measures used were thigh muscle volume (a measure of muscle mass), hand grip strength, overall muscle strength (the maximum weight that the subject could lift in a single repetition for leg press, chest press, knee extension, and knee flexion) and isokinetic power (the power attained in knee extension and flexion exercises). The results were pretty impressive for the omega-3 group compared with the control group:

Thigh muscle volume (muscle mass) increased by 3.6%

Handgrip strength increased by 6%.

Overall muscle strength increased by 4%.

Isokinetic power increased by 5.6%.

Other than complaints about fishy breath, there were no adverse effects in the omega-3 group.

The authors calculated that the increase in muscle mass and strength during 6 months of omega-3 supplementation was sufficient to offset 2-3 years of normal age-related muscle loss and strength loss.

The increase in muscle mass and strength associated with omega-3 supplementation was less than can be attained from regular resistance exercise coupled with adequate protein intake. However, it was the same or greater than could be obtained from testosterone, growth hormone or DHEA – and didn’t have the risks associated with those treatments.

For example, a recent study has concluded that testosterone injections are associated with a significant risk of stroke, acute coronary syndromes, hospitalization and death (Layton et al, JAMA Internal Medicine, doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.1573).

The authors concluded ”Fish oil-derived omega-3 therapy slows the normal decline in muscle mass and function in older adults and should be considered a therapeutic approach for preventing sarcopenia and maintaining physical independence in older adults.”

Limitations of the Study

Before you all run out and stock up on fish oil supplements, I should point out that this study has several limitations.

It is a very small study. It needs to be replicated by future studies.

It used a very high dose of fish oil (4 gm/day). High doses are often used in an initial study like this one just to establish whether there is an effect worth further study. However, this study needs to be repeated at lower doses to see if this benefit of omega-3 supplementation is also seen at more physiological doses (500 – 1,000 mg) of omega-3s.

Because of these limitations, I am not yet ready to agree with the authors that omega-3 supplementation “…should be considered a therapeutic approach for preventing sarcopenia and maintaining physical independence in older adults.” This is an interesting finding that holds the promise of an inexpensive, risk-free, natural approach for maintaining muscle mass in older adults, but it needs to be verified by future studies before it can be widely recommended.

There are many reasons to supplement with omega-3s, but at this point in time I would definitely not recommend fish oil supplementation as an alternative to resistance exercise and adequate protein intake for older adults who wish to prevent age-related loss of muscle mass and strength.

However, the health risks of testosterone, growth hormone, and DHEA supplementation are significant. For someone who is absolutely set on pursuing an exercise-free solution to maintaining muscle mass and strength as they age, I would recommend omega-3 supplementation first rather one of the riskier alternatives.

The Bottom Line

A recent study has suggested that omega-3 supplementation may prevent age-related loss of muscle mass and strength. The study was performed in both men and women age 60-85 who were not exercising on a regular basis.

Omega-3 supplementation was less effective than regular resistance exercise coupled with adequate protein intake, but equal to or greater in effectiveness than testosterone, growth hormone, or DHEA treatment.

This was a very small study and it used a very high dose of omega-3s. It is a promising finding because it represents an inexpensive, risk-free, natural approach for maintaining muscle mass in older adults, but it needs to be verified by future studies before it can be widely recommended.

There are many good reasons to supplement with omega-3s, but at this point in time I would definitely not recommend fish oil supplementation as an alternative to resistance exercise and adequate protein intake for older adults who wish to prevent age-related loss of muscle mass and strength. Resistance training combined with adequate protein is a proven intervention. Omega-3 supplementation is not.

However, the health risks of testosterone, growth hormone, and DHEA supplementation are significant. For someone who is absolutely set on pursuing an exercise-free solution to maintaining muscle mass and strength as they age, I would recommend omega-3 supplementation first rather one of the riskier alternatives. It might just work, and it is a lot less risky.

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.

Stretches For Sciatica Pain. Do They Work?

June 16, 2015 by Dr. Steve Chaney

How To Treat Sciatic Nerve Pain Naturally

Author: Julie Donnelly, LMT –The Pain Relief Expert

Editor: Dr. Steve Chaney

Stretches for sciatica pain work,

but only when muscle spasms are released first!

Most people have been told to stretch tight muscles but they haven’t been told that muscle spasms (trigger points) shorten the fibers and tie the muscles in tiny micro knots.

This analogy helps explain how muscle spasms cause pain.

Consider what happens if you have two trees, a big strong one and one that easily moves. Tie a rope straight across from tree to tree. If you pull on the rope it’s easy to see that the flexible tree bends.

However, if you tie several knots in the rope the flexible tree leans over toward the strong tree. Now if you try to stretch the rope to make the flexible tree stand up straight the knots put a strain on the points where the rope is tied.

Trying to stretch the rope causes the knots to tighten and overstretches the rope on either side of the knot.

This is what happens with your muscles.

In the case of sciatica, the muscle that crosses over your sciatic nerve is the piriformis. When the piriformis is shortened by a muscle spasm it places a downward pressure on the sciatic nerve, impinging the nerve. This gets complicated because other muscles cause your pelvis to rotate and press the bone up into your sciatic nerve.

If you try to stretch the piriformis muscle it causes the tight muscle to press down onto the sciatic nerve, and can potentially tear the muscle.

Release the Muscle Knots Before Stretches for Sciatica Pain

Before stretching, it’s easy and essential to release the muscle that causes sciatica pain.

Lie on the floor, place the Trigger Point Therapy Ball, or a new tennis ball, onto the piriformis muscles (pictured left).

Ease onto the ball until it doesn’t hurt. Then move the ball just a bit to search for other tender points. Hold 30-60 seconds on each tender point to release the muscle knots

Now You Are Ready To Do The Stretches for Sciatica Pain Relief!

This seated spinal twist is a great stretch for sciatica pain relief.

Make sure you are seated tall and exhale as you twist. Hold for a minute and switch sides.

Wishing you well,

Julie Donnelly

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.

About The Author