The data doesn’t lie. Sitting for hours each day does the body harm.  Sitting can reduce your lifespan, nullify the benefits of exercise, increase cancer risk, and other unhappy things.  Read why you have to get up and move.  Often!

Six Powerful Reasons to Sit LESS

WHAT BETTER moment to write about the dangers of sitting on your duff than when I am doing just that, along with a dozen others languorously sitting in this sunny Sausalito café?

I’m not a full-time blogger, nor am I a full-time (so-called) knowledge-worker, who typically massages his knowledge for employers while sitting.  And yet, my derrière can be often found spread out on a chair.

Former Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, famously used a standing desk.  Some people use a large stability ball. (Which I do too, here and there.)

Standing actually burns substantially more calories than sitting.  The stability ball is better than a chair because muscles that support your core must subtly work to keep you balanced and properly seated (aligned) on the ball, which also burns more calories than simply sitting in a chair.

So, what are you waiting for? More data?  Well, consider these six reasons that I grabbed and will here summarize from a Huffington Post article called, Sitting: 6 New Reasons It’s Bad For Your Health.

Six Reasons to Get Up and Move!

1. Sitting can diminish the benefits of exercise. Researchers from the University of Missouri published results suggesting that sitting throughout most of the day may put individuals at higher risk for diabetes, obesity and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease — even if you clear time for daily exercise.

2. Sitting can increase the risk of death.  As HuffPost editor Amanda Chan reported, a study in the American Journal of Epidemiology found that women who sat six or more hours a day were nearly 40 percent more likely to die over a 13-year-stretch than those who sat less than three hours.

Men fared better… sitting for more than six hours was linked with an 18-percent higher risk of death.

3. That no-good TV.  Every hour you sit in front of the TV, you can slash your life expectancy by nearly 22 minutes.   Sound like nonsense?  Well, here’s the study from the British Journal of Sports Medicine.

Do those hours add up to, say, six per day?  Well, couch potato, off your feat consistently for that long can cut your life expectancy by five years.

4. Sitting increases cancer risk. Is it ridiculous to suggest that sitting may be responsible for more than 170,000 cases of cancer yearly — with breast and colon cancers being the most influenced by rates of physical activity (and inactivity)?

Christine Friedenreich, an epidemiologist with Alberta Health Services told this to MSNBC: “For many of the most common cancers, it seems like something as simple as a brisk walk for 30 minutes a day can help reduce cancer risk.”

5. Sitting adds to butt fat. HuffPost UK reported this:

“In a bid to explain why sedentary behaviour causes weight-gain, scientists believe that the precursors to fat cells turn into flab (and end up producing more) when subjected to prolonged periods of sitting down, otherwise known as ‘mechanical stretching loads.’”

Translation and conclusion: Putting prolonged pressure on your bottom can produce up to 50% more fat on it.

6. Sitting is an independent risk factor for serious cardiovascular events. Men’s Health covered a study in the journal Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, in which researchers from Louisiana found that people who sit for the majority of the day are 54 percent more likely to die of a heart attack.

Now, you may feel fine sitting all day long.  I feel fine.  But I can tell you that facts matter to me, and I’m going to make sure that I consciously get off my duff every hour, walk around, stretch, do a few squats, before spreading the glutes back over the cushion.

Amen.

Related posts:

1. Knowledge Workers Beware — Sitting Could Kill You
2. Nine Reasons to Drink Green Tea (and limit coffee)
3. 30 Reasons to Take Vitamin D — Watch

Since in America 2/3rds of us are overweight, knowing about the ultimate risk of belly fat is both urgent and important. The facts recently uncovered are shocking!  Learn about the damage that excess fat can do, and how to minimize the risks.

WITH THANKSGIVING one day away, this subject may be viewed as heresy because it deals with diet, but I just learned a few things from yesterday’s Dr. Oz show and if I don’t write about it now, it may elude me later.  Let me add that it’s important for you to know this.

As Dr. Oz reports, the science is clear, and what it says is disturbing given that about 2/3rds of all Americans are overweight.  What we know now is that…

Fat can cause cancer!

This eye-popping assertion was the subject of yesterday’s Dr. Oz show, where he and Dr. Kathleen Wolin, an expert on the matter, delved into how fat causes cancer, what types of cancer fat can cause and what can be done to mitigate the risk.

And the risk is substantial.  To underscore this, I’ll ask you a question.  What do you think has the greatest potential to cause cancer, smoking cigarettes or being overweight?

The answer: Both smoking cigarettes and being overweight carry the same risk of creating cancer – a 30% chance each.

What the studies now demonstrate is that belly fat not only increases the risk of diabetes and heart disease, the so called “diabesity”, but of four types of cancer as well.  The four cancers are: Pancreatic Cancer, Colon Cancer, Kidney Cancer and Endometrial Cancer.

If you’re overweight by more than ten pounds, and certainly if you’re obese, you now have a very big reason to take the bull by the horns and lose weight.  If you’ve tried before and weren’t successful, this is the time to seek help, particularly if anyone in your family had any of the four fat-influenced cancers, diabetes or heart disease.

A Special Kind of Fat

What is under scrutiny here is not all fat irrespective of where it is on your body, but belly fat.  Not all fat has the same damage potential.  The fat on your thighs is not as harmful as that hanging around your belly.

Belly fat is called the “omentum”. Omentum is defined by About.com to be:

“… a large fatty structure which essentially hangs off the middle of your colon and drapes over the intestines inside the abdomen to be It is a hormone producer that disrupts normative chemicals in your body. These hormonal chemicals can feed cancer cells and resist the immune system’s response to them.”  (Source here.)

Here’s what it looks like:  

The 4 Cancers that Fat Can Cause

The one common characteristic of the four cancers that fat can cause is that they are all in organs located in proximity to the belly fat, especially when the fat covers a lot of ground – left, right, up, down, out and round.

1. Pancreatic Cancer.  As you may know, the pancreas is deep in the abdomen below the stomach and liver, which makes it close to the belly.  The pancreas helps regulate how the body processes sugar by producing insulin.  If impaired, the pancreas may have difficulty producing insulin, which is the major cause of diabetes.  What’s now known is that a pancreas that can’t regulate sugar due to excess belly fat leaves it vulnerable to cancer.

Reduce this risk by eating foods rich in folates, such as eggs, asparagus, oranges and green leafy vegetables.

2. Colon Cancer.  The omentum lies over the colon and gets entwined within it.  The pernicious effect it has on the colon is through increasing inflammation and reducing immune function.

Reduce this risk by taking two “baby” aspirin daily in warm water so that it’s quickly dissolved. Another tip is to take a curcumin supplement, as this herb is very useful in reducing inflammation.  To increase immune function, consider the supplements listed in Power Up Your Immune System and Antioxidants Kill Free Radicals.

3. Kidney Cancer. Belly fat is a major producer of the hormone “leptin” which can fuel cancer growth as it helps the blood vessels that feed the cancer cells in the kidney.

Reduce this risk by lowering your salt consumption, increasing potassium, and eating foods such as bananas, apricots and broccoli (all high in potassium).

4. Endometrial (Uterine) Cancer.  The omenum fat excretes estrogen and bathes the uterine in it constantly, hyper-stimulating it.  This can result in cancer.

Reduce this risk by drinking a cup of coffee without sugar and cream.  The thought is that coffee helps stimulate metabolism which has the effect of reducing estrogen, although the science is not clear on this.  Personally, I rather drink green tea for the metabolic stimulating effect.  I do this and take the Green Tea Mega supplement.

A 35+ Inch Waist is Dangerous

How do you know if you’re carrying too much belly fat?  Well, I guess it’s a good sign if you’re unsure, for if it’s not completely obvious, you may not be in the danger zone.  But just to make sure, here’s how to measure your waist:

Take your tape measure and bring it across your belly button and hips.  You can suck your belly in. Look down at the tape and gasp!  If the measurement is more than 35 inches for a woman, or 40 inches for a man, you need to take some weight loss measures.

One important thing to point out here, particularly to those of you who don’t consider yourself overweight, and that is maybe tomorrow you will be. In fact, odds are that as the years unfold, so will your belly.

The reason is that the average American adds a couple of pounds each year as we get older. The weight sneaks up on us, and as it does, so do the cancer risks described here. Obviously, it’s really important that you pay attention and not be lax about what might initially seem to be the gaining of a few pounds.

[Here are Dr. Oz’s five life saving numbers you should know.]

Tips and Tricks for Weight Loss

It’s beyond the scope of this post to deeply dig into a weight loss system, and surely there’s enough information on the Web about that.  I can suggest a few things, however, to get you on your way.

1. Get educated on the subject.  On this blog, you can read Dr Oz and the 14-Day Reboot Diet Plan, Diet 101 and The Basics – My Approach to Health.

2. Choose a few things that you’re willing to do to lose weight and add one each week or so.  For instance, one week you can reduce your red meat consumption to two servings and increase your green leafy vegetables to five servings.  One week, walk x blocks, week two 2x blocks.

3. Recruit a buddy.  This person will keep you on your plan and vice versa.

4. Establish new, healthy habits that you do at specific time each day.  For instance:

- Upon waking, first thing, drink as much purified water as you can.

- Then consume 20 to 30 grams of protein, either a whey, hemp, pea or rice protein supplement, and/or eggs and beans… in any event, ALWAYS eat something balanced and good for breakfast (see #1).

- Throughout the day, drink water with apple cider vinegar in it, about one teaspoon per eight ounces, or if you can’t stand the taste that way, first put the vinegar in your mouth and then chase it with water.  Vinegar is a good fat emulsifier.

- When eating high glycemic foods (white food – wheat, rice and such, sugary foods, packaged foods) add some vinegar or cinnamon to slow down the blood glucose reaction.

- Eat fiber-rich foods and have a back-up plan in case your day is taking you away from such foods.  A back-up plan would be to have some flax seed powder (grind fax seeds in your coffee grinder, or buy them already grounded) or psyllium husk powder and scoop  a tablespoon into a shaker jar filled with water, lemon water, or water with a touch of apple juice.

Drink it down fast before it congeals.

Mobility – Use It or Lose It!

My final statement here goes without saying but I’ll say it:

Each of the risk reducing behaviors cited above for the four different cancers influenced by fat can be made dramatically more effective with exercise.

There’s no getting around the fact that our bodies are made to move.  For most of us in the modern world, they only move from a building to a car to the dinner table.  Insufficient!  If you don’t know how to exercise, find out.  As I mentioned above, recruit a buddy and make it your business to find out how to exercise.

And make sure part of your exercise program includes stuff that makes you breathe heavily (aerobic/anaerobic) , stuff that works your muscles thoroughly (resistance training) and stuff that stretches you (like yoga).  Here’s a five-minute session to get you started.

OK… it’s Thanksgiving, go be thankful, eat heartily but consciously, and resolve to do some things differently.  Please share this with everyone you think could benefit by it.  And good luck.

Related posts:

1. Dr. Oz on Preventing Breast Cancer (Watch Video)
2. The Seriously Serious Problems of Obesity, Cancer and Obesity
3. Guidelines Push Back Age for Cervical Cancer Tests

South Korean researchers recently determined that the relative size of two fingers of a male determines the size of his penis.  No more posturing, fellas; or guessing, ladies – the fingers tell the tale.  Watch a sex expert discuss how women value penis length and the average penis length in the video below.

WHAT CAN I say – I’m chuckling at the notion that every guy who reads this will immediately begin measuring his finger length, and note the same about his buddies.  And now armed with this insight, woman might check out digit length as a filter for determining interest in getting horizontal.

No more surprises.

What I’m talking about is penis length.  If researchers in South Korea are right, penis length can be predicted by the relative length of two fingers on one hand.

Specifically, the shorter a man’s index finger is compared to his index ring finger, the longer is his penis.

I’ll now pause for the men to check out their fingers.

OK… let’s continue…

Quoting from this new study published in the Asian Journal of Andrology:

“According to our data … the shorter [the] index (second) finger than ring (fourth) finger you have, the longer stretched penile length you have.”

The good news is that, within normative means, penis size does not influence sexual prowess, says sexual health expert Dr. Catherine Hood in the video below, about which her female interviewer seems to agree.

Praise the Lord.

The Food Plate is in, and the Food Pyramid is history.  The healthy diet is simpler now, is better, and comes with a host of interactive tools that aim to suggest a diet that will work for you.  But there are a few issues I have with these tools.  If you’re muscular, you won’t get the correct advice.  And what’s with the milk!?

THE USDA released today their new food plate that replaces the old food pyramid.  As I wrote in The New Food Pyramid is a Plate, the Obama administration, in part lead by Michelle Obama, has been studying how to remake the food pyramid so that information about diet is more relevant, useful and true.

This is the job of the new “Plate” which is divided into four sections – fruits, grains, proteins and vegetables, with a side of diary.  The statements alongside the Plate at ChooseMyPlate.gov are these:

Balancing Calories

● Enjoy your food, but eat less.

● Avoid over-sized portions.

Foods to Increase

● Make half your plate fruits and vegetables.

● Make at least half your grains whole grains.

● Switch to fat-free or low-fat (1%) milk.

Foods to Reduce

● Compare sodium in foods like soup, bread, and frozen meals ― and choose the foods with lower numbers.

● Drink water instead of sugary drinks.

Gone are any references to sugars, fats or oils, and what was once a category called “meat and beans” is now simply “proteins.” Next to the plate is a blue circle for dairy, which could be a glass of milk or a food such as cheese or yogurt.

Doesn’t seem like rocket science, does it?  But there’s a few things that are new and good to know, such as specifying that the grains you eat are “whole” grains, not the decimated white variety that constitutes the typical bread, bagel, pasta and pizza.  Or that half the Plate should be fruits and veggies, not white grains.

There’s more, much more at the site that might be useful to people not well versed in what constitutes healthy diets, such as information for specific audiences (pregnant women, preschoolers, kids, weight loss), information for professionals, multimedia presentations, and interactive tools.

I jumped into Interactive Tools.

Interactive Tools

Here’s what’s presented in Interactive Tools:

Daily Food Plan – Get a personalized plan just for you.  Quick access to food info – food groups, calories & comparisons.

Daily Food Plans for Preschoolers – Get your child’s Plan today.

Food Tracker – Feedback on your food and physical activity.

Daily Food Plans for Moms – Start out right as a new mom or mom-to-be.

Food Planner – Plan what to eat to help reach your personal goals.

I decided to try the Daily Food Plan. I entered my stats, age, gender, weight, amount of daily physical activity and came up with this warning:

“The weight you entered is above the healthy range for your height. This may increase your risk for health problems. Some people who are overweight should consider weight loss. Click here (new window) for more information about health risks and whether you should try to lose weight, or talk with your health care provider.”

This is the long-winded version of what I usually get when using the BMI calculation, which truncates the above message into something like, “You’re Overweight”.

That’s because neither of these systems accounts for muscle mass.  Muscle weighs about 40% more than fat and if you have more than the average bear, the extra pounds associated with the muscle is measured as fat.

I’m not being delusional.  At 6’4”, I have a 36” waist and 46” chest – not the data sample for someone who needs to “talk with your health provider.”  But according to the BMI calculation and that used to determine the Daily Food Plan, 215 pounds is too heavy for me.

Why Milk?

My next pet peeve is this American love affair with milk.  People, the milk referred to here is made by cows.  Cows make the milk for calves, not people.  OK, maybe 1% or 2% milk will help you avoid growing the three pounds a day that a calf does, but why is it so valuable to one’s diet that it’s included in the new Food Plate?  Is it simply a matter of the diary lobby?

Diets for Kids

For some reason, the individually created diet plans for kids still uses the now jettisoned pyramid symbol.  I inputted data for my niece, Isa, when she was five years old for the pre-schooler diet plan.

The inputs are age, gender, and amount of daily physical activity.  This is the result for Isa:

Note that at the bottom of the pyramid are the amounts by weight of each of the new Plate food categories that are thought to be correct for Isa.  (Again, just don’t get the milk thing.)  What you can’t read is that statement at the bottom, which says:

“This Plan is a 1600 calorie food pattern. It is based on average needs for a 5 year old girl who is active more than 60 minutes a day. Your preschooler’s food needs also depend on how fast she is growing and other factors. Your child’s doctor can track her height and weight over time to identify specific needs. A preschooler should not be urged to eat these exact amounts — their needs may differ from the average.”

My 2 Cents

Overall, I’m pleased with the new Plate given the supporting material at ChooseMyPlate, the government site from which I’ve been getting the above information.  If people are willing to be guided by it, this country may divert the mounting health catastrophe that lies before us.  (If you think I exaggerate, read my five-part series on obesity staring with, The Seriously Serious Problems of Obesity.)

My two nits have already been mentioned:

1. The tool for determining if you’re overweight and thus what your diet should be does not take into account those who are muscular; and
2. Milk is not some panacea food… some people do not well digest milk sugars, and there are many healthy alternatives, such as almond milk, hemp milk (if you’re the milky type) or simply water.

Do let your friends know about the The New Food Plate, particularly those who could use a nudge in a healthy direction, and most certainly for those who have overweight children who make the rules about what gets bought at the grocery store.

Yep.

Related posts:

1. The New Food Pyramid is a Plate
2. On a Budget? Good, Healthy Food is Often Cheaper (Watch)
3. Six Best of 2010 — Food, Diet and Nutrition

Consumer Reports has added another service – Consumer Reports Health – to help demystify what is good and not so good for your health.  Take a look at what they’re offering.

I’M NOT in the business of hawking other people’s stuff, but I’d like to share an email from Consumer Reports with you that my sister just forwarded to me.

Consumer Reports declares itself to be an unbiased reviewer of many things that we buy.  For some, it’s the consumer bible about effectiveness, durability, quality, etc., particularly from a comparative perspective – one product vs another.

Consumer Reports is now offering ConsumerReportsHealth.org for $9 per year (first year).  As they say in the email:

“ConsumerReportsHealth.org provides objective, evidence-based Ratings for medical treatments, drugs and natural medicines. We rate health products and services with the same expertise and independence we use to rate cars, electronics and appliances for more than 70 years. And as long as you remain 100% satisfied you will receive the benefits of automatic renewal with continuous access to ConsumerReportsHealth.org”

Here are examples of the information that would be made available:

As someone who blogs about health matters, I can tell you first-hand that there’s a lot of conflicting and confusing information out there in the marketplace.  This might be helpful.  Know that I haven’t used the service, yet, and would not be compensated in any way by Consumer Reports if you subscribed.

If you have used this service, please let us know what you think in the Comments section below.

Related posts:

1. Newsweek’s Ms. Begley’s Five Health Care Lies
2. Debunking Health Care Mythmaking with Healthcare Journalist J.R. Reid
3. Health Advice for Women (and men) – A Sauvignon Tale

This is a long list of supplements that are thought to offer some level of protection against radiation.  By and large, these are the very same supplements that are touted to clean and rebuild the body of toxins, as well as provide essential nutrition.

I WAS on an email list that began who knows where that forwarded the following material without attribution.  I read it, mostly agree with it, have blogged about much of it already.  I post it here in its entirety without attribution because I don’t know the source.  If any of it intrigues you, you might google around for sources that confirm these supplement assertions.

Potassium Iodide: Of course, most everyone knows this one.  This can protect the thyroid gland by saturating the thyroid with iodide so it cannot absorb radioactive iodine.

“The idea of stockpiling the drug, potassium iodide, has been debated since the 1979 accident at Three Mile Island, near Harrisburg, Pa. Proponents renewed discussions of the proposal after the explosion of the Chernobyl reactor in the Ukraine, a 1986 accident that is now blamed for thousands of thyroid cancers, mostly in people who were in utero or younger than 2 years old at the time. Those people, regardless of their age, who took potassium iodide at the time were protected.”

“But the new recommendation is far more complex, establishing different recommended doses and different conditions for use for eight categories of people: newborns; infants younger than 3 years old; children 3 to 12; youths 12 to 18; adults 18 to 40; adults older than 40; and women who are lactating or are pregnant.

For those younger than 18 and for pregnant or lactating women, the F.D.A. will recommend giving the drug at a level of radiation exposure a fifth as large as advised in the 1980′s.”

What this confusing mish-mash  means is, if you get sufficient iodine in your diet, you should be protected.  Even if exposed, organic iodine can actually remove radioactive iodine that has lodged in the thyroid gland.  More dose info below under Kelp and Sea Vegetables.

The RDA according to the Nutrition Almanac - http://mutage.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/18/4/337 – is 150 mcg (millionths of a gram) per day.  The latest therapeutic dose recommendations are complicated depending on age, body type, exposure etc. General guidelines are adults and adolescents a full therapeutic dose is 130 mcg.  Children over 3-12 yrs. 65 mcg.  Over one month-3 yrs.  32 mcg.  Birth to one month  16 mcg.  By saturating the thyroid gland it is protected up to one month., which is long enough for the radioactive iodine (which has a half life of 8 days) to disappear from the environment.  Without the potassium iodide (KI) taken in advance of an attack to saturate the thyroid, its protective effect lasts about 24 hours! You should have tablets on hand

Beta-1,3 Glucan: Extracted from the cell walls of baker’s yeast it is a potent immune enhancer. It activates important macrophages and is also an anti oxidant.  Studies by the Army showed that glucan was a powerful protectant against a lethal dose of radiation. Ref 2 page 9.

Polyamines: “The free radicals generated by ultraviolet (UV) or ionizing radiation can attack cellular lipids, proteins and DNA. Endogenous free radical scavengers such as glutathione and the polyamines (e.g, spermidine and spermine) can inhibit the action of ROS (peroxides and hydroxyl radicals).”

Naringin: “Radiation is a well-known inducer of free radicals and compounds that can scavenge free radicals may reduce radiation-induced DNA damage. Naringin, a bioflavonoid predominant in grapefruit and other citrus fruits, has been found to scavenge free radicals, therefore it may also reduce radiation-induced damage.”

Dimethyl Sulfoxide: Or DMSO,  “prevents DNA Nicking Mediated by Ionizing Radiation or Iron/Hydrogen Peroxide-Generated Hydroxyl Radical.”  (This is a very valuable substance and you would do well to find out more about it.)

Melatonin: “As melatonin administration reversed oxidative organ injury, as assessed by biochemical and histopathological findings, it is suggested that supplementing cancer patients with adjuvant therapy of melatonin may have some benefit for successful radiotherapy.”

Polyethylene glycol: “There is disclosed a method of protecting animals including humans against ionizing radiation by injecting the animals with a polymer having the approximate formula H(OCH.sub.2 CH.sub.2).sub.n OH, where n varies between 4 and 13. Particularly, it is found that polyethylene glycol (molecular weight between 200 and 600), polyethyleneglycolmonoethylether (molecular weight between 200 and 600), and polyvinylpyrrolidone (molecular weight up to 10,000) when injected into standard experimental animals, such as mice, protects them from the lethal effect of ionizing radiation.

Tetracycline: “Tetracyclin derivatives and ceftriaxone, a cephalosporin antibiotic, protect neurons against apoptosis induced by ionizing radiation. Our results suggest that some tetracycline derivatives, such as doxycycline and minocycline, and ceftriaxone, a cephalosporin derivative, protect neurons against apoptotic death.”

Vitamin C: This may be the most important thing of all to have on hand for many applications, e.g. poison, bites, viruses, etc.  The book “Vitamin C, Infectious Diseases, & Toxins”   by Thomas Levy, MD, should be one of your most prized possessions along with as much Sodium Ascorbate as you can store.  Vitamin C cannot only protect against radiation but also repair damage from previous exposure.

Vegetable Oil: Extra virgin olive oil but any cold pressed, extra virgin oil will do in an emergency.  If you are exposed or are going to be, you can drink a half cup and if will help supply protection for the cell membranes. ( I got this from the Atomic Energy Commission Report many years ago but it still is true.)  Some studies show that applying these oils to the skin can help protect against radiation skin burns. Vitamin E oil applied to the skin, along with Vitamin C and aloe vera  could help mitigate radiation burns.

Oils: Dr. James Ashikava found that mice will survive normally lethal doses of x-rays if they are given common edible unprocessed vegetable oils—especially olive or peanut oils.  It is reported from Mexico, that those who work or live near sources of radiation, such as atomic labs or nuclear power plants, eat or rub vegetable oils on their skin for greater protection.

Rutin: Strengthens the capillary walls and reduces hemorrhaging caused by x-rays. In animal studies reduced the death rate caused by excessive x-rays by 800 per cent.

Dose: 100 to 200 mg a day as protective dose. If exposed, 800 mg. or more a day. It is harmless.

Pantothenic Acid: Prevents radiation injuries.  In animal studies, the survival rate was increased by 200 per cent by giving pantothenic acid prior to exposure. Brewers yeast is by far the best source of this substance. Dose:  Preventive—5 mg. to 15 mg. for children, 25 mg. to 50 mg. for adults.  Use a double or triple dose as a therapeutic after exposure.

Brewer’s Yeast: Believe it or not, brewer’s yeast can help protect and repair damage from many types of radioactivity.

Vitamin F:Essential fatty acids or EFA, present in all crude, cold-pressed vegetable oils.

Lemon: Or lemon peel concentrate.  Probably due to the bioflavonoids.  It is always good to take Vitamin C and bioflavonoids together since the latter multiplies the effect of the C.

Lecithin: 2-3 tbsp. a day, will help counteract the effects of radiation.

Kelp: Supplement the diet with easily assimilable organic iodine, as in kelp (Norwegian or other clean water kelp if possible),  this will saturate the thyroid so radioactive iodine will not be absorbed. (It, like all sea vegetables contains an amazing substance called sodium alginate which we will get to later.) Dose:  1 to 2 tsp. Of granules daily, or 5 to 10 tablets.  Protective program for Strontium-90.

Calcium and Magnesium: both help your body to pass off Strontium 90. Get supplement not made from animal bones which contains Strontium 90. Dolomite is best. Dr. Linus Pauling says heavy calcium supplementation will reduce strontium 90 absorption by 50 percent, but be careful not to over indulge unless exposed.

From the valuable resource book, “Fighting Radiation and Chemical Pollutants with Foods, Herbs and Vitamins” by Steven R. Schechter, N.D.  (likely out of print) I have purposely left out some of the doses and other specifics in many cases to  space constraints, to avoid giving medical advice, and to encourage you to find and buy this book and the others. However, because the book is out of print I have included some dosages; keeping in mind that the book is over 20 years old. If I do err in this direction, consider it my opinion and not medical advice.  Go to the information source;  When you need it, the info will be priceless and still applicable.

Calcium: By the mechanism of selective uptake, calcium blocks or decreases the absorption of strontium-90, calcium-45 and other radioactive isotopes by the skeletal system.  Calcium also helps to eliminate radioactive isotopes that are lodged in the bones!  The National Research Council recommends that adults consume 800 mg. of calcium per day.  For children and lactating women this is 1,000 mg. and 1,400 mg.. Too much calcium can be harmful. The best forms of supplemental calcium are calcium citrate, gluconate, carbonate, lactate, or amino acid chelated calcium.  It is good to take a calcium—magnesium combination.

Magnesium: Like calcium, magnesium prevents the uptake of radioisotopes and helps to eliminate already stored strontium-90.  One reason not to use synthetic vitamin D (Calciferol) is that it can combine with magnesium and carry it out of the body.  Calciferol is contained in much commercial milk.  Fluoride also leaches calcium from the body among other horrendous things.  The optimal diet should contain about ½ as much magnesium as calcium.  The RDA for calcium is 350 mg. to 700 mg.  The high end should not be exceeded but since the Standard American Diet  or SAD does not supply enough magnesium, supplements are recommended.

Sea Vegetables: Sodium alginate is one of the more powerful protective substances in sea vegetables like kelp, which includes arame, wakame, kombu,  and hijiki.   Sodium alginate reduces the amount of strontium-90 absorbed by bone tissue by 50 to 83 percent.  (You can also obtain a great source of this in a fantastic herbal combo by Solaray called Detox Blend SP-25.)

Bee Pollen: Studies show that bee pollen can significantly reduce the usual side effects of both radium and cobalt-60 radiotherapy and also the sickness after massive abdominal x-rays. One study showed that the proliferation of cancer cells stopped in cancerous tumors induced in mice.  (This is only indicative and does not purport to be medical advice. One should go to the source and study the relevant information before drawing conclusions. Try to get real bee pollen from an organic bee keeper, uncooked.)

Bee Propolis: Besides the healing and anti bacterial qualities of this substance, it has been effective in clinical stages of radioepithelitis, i.e. inflammation of epithelial tissue due to radiation. (Same as above.  Get unheated, raw organic honey; it is a good source of pollen, royal jelly and propolis.)

Fermented Foods: Due to their multiple beneficial effect on the intestines, fermented foods help to counteract the toxins from radioactive fallout that is ingested from foods, e.g. yogurt, sauerkraut, kefir, etc.

Beets: Beets have been shown to rebuild hemoglobin of the blood after exposure to radiation. Rats fed a diet of 20 percent beet pulp were able to prevent cesium-137 absorption and 97 to 100 percent more effectively than rats given no beets.

Primary-grown Nutritional Yeast:  Besides having Vitamin E,  it also contains the nucleic acids RNA and DNA, both of which have been shown to have radio protective qualities.  It has been shown to help rebuild and regenerate cells damaged by radiation, and also to produce relief from radiation poisoning and it’s many horrible symptoms.  Nutritional yeast has a good amount of many important nutrients.  Primary –grown yeasts bonds with and absorb heavy metals such as uranium, lead and mercury!

Garlic and Onions: Cysteine, also present in onions, binds with and deactivates both the radioactive isotopes and toxic metals such as cadmium, lead and mercury.  The sulfur in cysteine helps the kidneys and liver detoxify the body.  Garlic has many wonderful healing properties and should be researched.

Green Cabbage: Lourau and Lartigue reported  that green cabbage increased the resistance of guinea pigs to radiation.  The US Army  found that broccoli, green cabbage and alfalfa reduced the effects of radiation on guinea pigs by 50 percent!  (You can get a good organic alfalfa pill very cheap from Nature’s Plus.)

In one mice study, olive oil taken internally fully protected rats against progressive doses of x-rays ranging from  300 to 2,400 roentgens.  The olive oil provided optimal protection when is comprised about 15 percent of the total  calories of the diet.  Olive oil and sesame oil are more resistant to breaking down from heat while cooking and have a longer shelf life.

Vitamin A: In 1974, researchers from India found that vitamin A, when taken internally by humans, hastened recovery from radiation.  In 1984, Dr. Eli Seifter and a team of researchers fro the Albert Einstein College of Medicine….reported vitamin A and beta-carotene counteracted both partial and total body gamma radiation. It also improved the healing of wounds; reduced weight loss, thymic and splenic atrophy, and adrenal enlargement; and prevented gastro-ulceration and an abnormal decrease in red and white blood cell formation.  (The therapeutic purposes, 25,000 to 35,000 IU are recommended for adults.  During emergencies or crisis situations, intensive exposure may warrant as much as 40,000 to 100,000 IU of beta-carotene, but should be taken for no more than three to four weeks. Infants should not consume high amounts. This info is only very partial and you should consult the book for specifics.)

Vitamin B Complex: There are so many benefits to the B vitamins that there is no space to list them.  One of the many is they normalize the red and white blood cell count, because the destruction of white blood cells by radiation can last for extended periods of time. The various B vitamins have different effects and should be taken together.

Vitamin C and Bioflavonoids: Not to be redundant;  researchers at Harvard Medical School said, “Our experiment showed that vitamin C can prevent damage from radiation….it somehow keeps the radiation from killing the cells.”   Their experiment indicates that the dosage for humans exposed to intensive radiation would be approximately 10 grams per day—a mega dose. (More about C and radiation later from Dr. Thomas Levy. The literature must be studied before mega dosing but levels up to 50,000 and more have been administered for short periods with good results.  If more than 750 mg. of vitamin C is taken daily, calcium, magnesium, B6 (within the whole B Complex), and sufficient water to prevent kidney stones.  The body cannot store much C and it is used for darn near everything in the body, so make sure you get enough.)

Vitamin D: An adult therapeutic dose would range from 400 IU per day to 1,000 IU daily.  During an emergency, adult daily dosage could go as high as 2,000 IU, if taken for no longer than one month.  (I would say to find a natural vitamin D as there have been reports that synthetic vitamin D has some bad side effects.)

Vitamin E: It can protect against the effects of x-rays and radioactive cobalt. It improves anemia following exposure to radiation. It can provide internal and external protection against  cesium-137 which is a common component of fallout and nuclear power plant leaks and routine emissions. For the form of E d-alpha-tocopherol, an adult weighting about 155 would need about 900 IU per day.  (I take more than this every day normally. On exposure, I would take 1600 IU as I have many times for several weeks.  I prefer to get the dry, water dispersable E, but any kind is good as long as it is fresh. The oil can go rancid.  Also, try to get the most natural form.)  E also helps prevent the destruction of Vitamin A and fatty acids by massive doses of x-rays. If large doses of C, B and E are taken before exposure, the terrible symptoms of radiation sickness can be reduced or eliminated to a large degree.  Caution: E should be used cautiously if you have high blood pressure or rheumatic heart disease.

Selenium: Wonderful element.  Does so many positive things impossible to list.  It fortifies the immune system, reduces the rate of cancer in humans and helps to alleviate leukopenia, (abnormal decreases of white blood cells). The RDA is 50 to 200 micrograms per day.  Some recommend as much as 100 to 300 micrograms per day, but more should be under medical supervision. It is most effective when taken with vitamins A and E.

Potassium: If there is a deficiency, radionuclides like cesium-137, cesium-134, potassium-40 and potassium-42, are absorbed through selective uptake etc. RDA is uncertain  but health authorities suggest a minimum of 2,000 to 6,000 mg. in the diet.  Usually supplementation is not necessary and too much can be dangerous.

Zinc: A diet that supplies sufficient zinc blocks the uptake of radioactive zinc-65.  Zinc DTPA has been used to chelate americium-241 from a nuclear accident victim.  Natural zinc also will help the body eliminate several toxic heavy metals including cadmium, aluminum, lead, and excess copper.  Although doses over 50 mg. per day have been used it should be under a doctor’s care.

Iron: A number of studies indicate exposure to radiation significantly decreases levels of iron in the body.  Radioactive iron and plutonium, isotopes similar in structure to iron, can be carried to iron storage sites such as liver, bone marrow, ovaries or testes, and lungs if the body is deficiency in iron.  The National Research Council recommends a daily intake of 18 mg. for women, 30 to 60 mg. daily if pregnant or more if lactating;  10 mg. for men, and 10 to 18 mg. for children. After exposure to radiation or loss of blood, supplementation of approximately 10 to 18 mg. daily.

Siberian Ginseng: Eleutherococcus senticosus is the best for medicinal purposes. Soviet researchers reported that eleuthero extract has radio protective qualities, and can be used in conditions of acute or chronic radiation sicknesses such as hemorrhaging, severe anemia, dizziness, nausea, vomiting and headaches due to x-rays. It can lengthen survival time after exposure.  The list is too long.  Do some research. It is almost miraculous  protecting against infections. poisons, etc.  It increases human resistance to a remarkably wide variety of stressors.

Adult extract treatment doses: 20 to 40 drops before meals, two or three times per day.  Children: single dose one drop per each year of age, repeated twice a day.

Panax Ginseng: Studies have found this Asian version is effective against radiation as well.   Researchers observed, ginseng increases the rate of production of serum albumin and gamma-globulin as well as DNA and RNA protein, and lipid synthesis in bone marrow cells.  Also, human subjects taking ginseng root were able to acclimatize more easily to oxygen-deficient air.  Both types can be taken daily as they build up in the body in a positive way.  Best to take small amounts over a long period.

Aloe: Of the more than 200 species of Aloe, these species have shown evidence of being radio-protectants: aloe barbadensis (aloe vera),  aloe arborescens, aloe striatula, and aloe saponaria.  Emulsions can prevent the development of local reactions in radiation therapy and treating radiation burns of second and third degrees.  Aloe also accelerates the process of tissue repair and normal cell growth. It is optimal to use its fresh form direct from the juicy leaves of the plant.  It also has pain-relieving properties.  Use fully mature leaves from outer leaves first.

Chaparral: Also known as the creosote bush, one of the active ingredients is NDGA.  One thing it does is inhibit the tumor electron transport system, which denies such growths the electrical energy they require. It also corrects malignant melanoma in many cancer patients. Chaparral  is an excellent antibiotic and helps purify and detoxify the blood.  Use with caution and supervision. Dose:  If taken in tablet form take an extra 300-750 mg. of vitamin C per day to help the body process the concentrated resins and gums in the herb.

Green Tea and Black Tea: Indications are that the radio-protective effects of tea catechins are associated with the antioxidative property, taken both before and after irradiation.  Caution  with large use of black or green teas because they contain large amounts of caffeine and tannic acid.  Also, some evidence that green tea takes up large amounts of fluoride.

Nucleic acids: RNA and DNA increase the survival rate of mammals exposed to irradiation.  Bee pollen, nutritional yeast and certain sea algae such as chlorella contain relatively large percentages of nucleic acids. Onions contain RNA.

Cysteine: A natural amino acid helps counteract several kinds of radiation. Caution: Do not take as a seperate supplement. Can be a dangerous excitotoxin like glutamate (MSG) or aspartate in abnormal quantities.   Occurs in sulfur containing vegetables most of which are in the cabbage family.  Kale is by far the best source with watercress and brussel sprouts good sources too.  Make sure you get non-irradiated vegetables.

Pectin: Obtained from ripe fruit like apples.  Like sodium alginate in agar and kelp, pectin bonds or chelates with radioisotopes, especially strontium-90, and reduces the absorption into the skeletal system.

Papain: In one study, 50 percent of the rats given papain survived a normally lethal dose of radiation.

Medicinal Charcoal: Has the ability to absorb and neutralize radioactive substances and some toxic materials.  Researchers report that 10 grams or 1 tablespoon of charcoal can absorb about 3 to 7 grams of materials.

Organic Germanium: Ge-132, according to one study, “Radioactive rays release electrons that destroy cells and blood corpuscles….Germanium floating near the blood corpuscles skillfully catches those released electrons and lets them move around its nucleus.”  In other studies mutagenesis of cells exposed to cesium-137 and gamma rays, was “remarkably reduced” without affecting cellular growth or survival.  It seemed to improve the fidelity of DNA replication.  Ge-132 protects cysteine, an amino acid with known protective value. Dose:  25 mg. to 100 mg. per day is often used in Japan.  It can be derived from onions, pearled barley, and watercress.

Sodium Alginate: An effective preventive and therapeutic substance against radiation and heavy metals according to Tanaka.   In two experiments using rats, sodium alginate decreased by a factor of 12, the uptake of several radioactive isotopes—including strontium-90, strontium-85, barium, radium, and calcium. Skoryna el al. concluded that ingestion of small but regular does of alginate is effective in preventing the daily absorption of small doses of radioactive strontium and other contaminants that are present in the environment.  Brown sea vegetables such as kelp are the most effective sources.

Alginate is nontoxic and is not reabsorbed for the GI tract and appears to have no adverse affects even at high doses.  Red sea vegetables, such a dulse are most effective at binding plutonium, and green algae binds cesium most effectively.

Dose: The Atomic Energy Commission recommends for maximum protection against radioactive poisoning for humans, taking a minimum of 2 to 3 ounces of sea vegetables a week or 10 grams (two tablespoons) a day of sodium alginate supplements.  During or after exposure to radiation, the dosage should be increased to two full tablespoons of alginate four times daily to insure that there is a continual supply in the GI or gastrointestinal tract.   There may be a rare problem of constipation but this can be avoided if the sodium alginate is made into a fruit gelatin.  Agar, derived from sodium alginate in kelp, is a safe, nontoxic substance that can be used as a thickening agent or gelatin.  (Solaray has a great product I use now called Detox Blend )

Another benefit of sea vegetables is the natural iodine. If there is insufficient iodine in the diet radioactive iodine-131 will be absorbed and collected in the thyroid gland. Even if radioactive iodine is absorbed by the thyroid, taking natural iodine helps offset the side effects of exposure.  According to Dr. Russell Morgan, one mg. of iodine for children and five mg. for adults taken daily will reduce by about 80 percent the radioactive iodine accumulated in the thyroid.  Whole foods are the best source of iodine, e.g. sea vegetables like hijiki, arame, kombu and dulse.  Iodine is leached from the thyroid gland by drinking chlorinated water.  Avoid iodized salt which contains excessive sodium and no potassium.  Sea vegetables are rich in vitamins and contain most if not all of the essential minerals and trace elements.  Sea vegetables also help dissolve fat and mucus deposits.

Chlorophyll: A number of studies found that chlorophyll-rich foods can decrease radiation toxicity.  Spirulina and chlorella are two micro-algae that are rich in this substance, as are leafy greens, celery, parsley, the sprouts of any grain or bean, the young shoots of any edible grass and sunflower greens.  Chlorophyll is similar in structure to hemoglobin.

Related posts:

1. Japan’s Radiation Fallout – Protect Yourself!
2. Promising Ways to Fight Radiation Poisoning
3. Worried About the Potassium Iodide Supply?

News about potential harmful effects of cell phones on your health is in the airwaves and print lately due to a new study.  Read about it, what Dr. Mercola’s views are, and simple precautions you can take.

REMEMBER THAT old commercial that shows an egg frying on a griddle and the voice over says, “This is your brain on drugs”?

Well, led by Dr. Nora D. Volkow, researchers from the National Institutes of Health have found that 50 minutes of cell phone use does effect the brain.

Brain scans demonstrated increased glucose metabolism happening in the area closest to the cell phone antenna, as the image above shows.

The vital question is – “Does this basically prove that cell phone use is dangerous”?

There have been several cell phone studies aimed at determining if using a cell phone is deleterious to your health.  The results have been equivocal.  Perhaps what’s different about this study is that is proves that something is happening in the brain due to cell phone use.  There’s no denying that something is going on… you can see it (note the pictures above and below).

Again, what’s important to know is whether this brain response effect is harmful.

Personally, I’m not waiting to amend my cell phone behavior until the science is conclusive.  It’s very easy to substantially reduce, or eliminate the brain’s reaction to cell phone use by doing one of three simple actions:

1. Use the cell phone’s speaker phone option.
2. Use an ear plug… but… if you really want to err on the side of health, don’t use one that has its own power source; rather one that is simply a conduit of the sound emanating from the cell phone.  (See below.)
3. Keep the cell phone away from your body as much as possible, particularly away from your reproductive parts.

Long term health problems are the ones that are most devastating to ourselves and to society at large.  They tend to happen because there’s something in human nature that ignores problems that are not banging on your head right now.  So, we blithely go about our days eating anything, sitting on the couch, drinking soda/alcohol  etc., largely without worry about the future.

Same with cell phones.  If it does wind up creating some cancer or some other major debilitation, we won’t know it for many years.  Don’t make the bet that it won’t prove to be harmful, or won’t happen to you.

My sister just bought one of those Blue Tube cell phone headsets recommended by Dr. Mercola. Watch what he has to say about the potential dangers of cell phones (below), and use the link (below the video) to check out the Blue Tube headset.

Related posts:

1. Watch: Stem Cell Research — A Father’s Fight
2. Four Ways to Build a Better Brain
3. Gotta Feed The Brain!

BLOGGERS SEEM to have a habit of providing lists.  10 best of this, and 5 greatest of that. 

There seems to be two reasons for such titles:  1.Reader like to scan blog posts, and lists are easy to scan and simpler to remember; and, consequently, 2. Blog posts with such titles are read more than those without an “x list” of something in the title.

So, in this Sunday Summary (a tradition started here two weeks ago), I’m going repost summaries of some of my diet/food focused articles of the past that are comprised of lists.

Read on and you’ll quickly get what I mean.

The 40 Best Age-Erasing Superfoods delves into the specific nutritional benefits derived from certain foods, such as flaxseeds, sweet potatoes, rosemary, blueberries, green tea, and 35 more.  Have you heard the adage, “Food is medicine”?  Well, this article tells you why each of these 40 foods is referred to as a “superfood”.  It does a body good.

86 Year-old Billionaire’s Recipe for Longevity is the companion article to the 40 Best Age-Erasing Superfoods cited above.  Oprah Winfrey interviewed billionaire David Murdock to learn about his remarkable vitality and the millions of dollars he has spent scientifically evaluating the health and longevity-boosting effects of certain foods, a list of 33 of which are reviewed, foods he calls, “The healthiest on earth”.

If you’ve made it through the above two articles, perhaps you’d like to give your eyes a rest from eating and are ready to watch a video.  In 5 Healthy Eating Nutrition Tips, fitness guru Annick Robinson walks us through the grocery store and salad bar with a running commentary of what’s best to eat and why.

So, that’s the numbers game for this Sunday’s collection of summaries.

Bon appétit!

Related posts:

1. Superfoods, Anyone?
2. On The Road? Tips to Eat Right
3. Sunday Summary: Lifespan, Superfoods and Happiness

(And 5 Ways to Get It)

This is a pretty comprehensive story about Vitamin D.  This sun-made vitamin has gotten much press lately indicating that it may be a wonder-supplement that can help combat everything from cancer to obesity.  The Vitamin D story is important for everyone to know, but certainly for the elderly, for those with dark skin, and you summer sun worshipers too.

TODAY IS a good day to write about Vitamin D.  The season is turning to winter.  And here in the Bay Area, California, it’s overcast and raining; certainly, no Vitamin D producing sun is in sight.

You may have noticed a plethora of articles written over the last couple of years touting the marvels of Vitamin D — indeed, the bulk of this post, particularly the video of internationally acclaimed Vitamin D expert Dr. Michael Holick (below), underscores this view.

However, a recent study casts a cloud of confusion over what has been a near ubiquitous view of the necessity of relatively (by historical standards) high doses of Vitamin D.  I refer to a recent report released from the Institute of Medicine (“IOM”) that sets new RDAs (recommended daily averages) for Vitamin D and calcium.

The IOM report has something in it for both those who tout and decry the benefits of Vitamin D.

Two New York newspapers that reviewed this report aptly demonstrate the arm wrestling match:

On one side, The New York Times headline concludes, “Extra Vitamin D and Calcium Aren’t Necessary, Report Says.” (Which gives the wrong impression because the report from the IOM increased the Recommended Daily Allowance for Vitamin D).

Representing the contrary view, The Wall Street Journal’s clarion call was, “Triple That Vitamin D Intake, Panel Prescribes.”

Confused yet?  Is Vitamin D the Real Deal?

In this article published by the Huffington Post, Dr Leo Galland dives into the IOM report and presents his readers with his informed insights about what’s really going on.  His conclusion:

“The bottom line: The IOM report does not advise against Vitamin D supplementation and in fact raises both the recommended daily allowance and tolerable upper limits of Vitamin D… So, when it comes to Vitamin D, one size doesn’t fit all and supplementation should be based on individual needs.”

As an example of individualization, Dr. Galland cites a little known peccadillo of Vitamin D.

Apparently, there’s an enzyme in our bodies that deactivates Vitamin D as its levels rise. The effect this winds up having is to more dramatically reduce the Vitamin D in a person who is exposed to high Vitamin D supplementation or sunlight, and subsequently stops supplementation or exposure to sunlight.

Dr. Galland:

“The result is that people taking higher doses of Vitamin D supplements may not have a predictable, stable increase in their Vitamin D levels, and people who get a lot of sun exposure in summer, but take no supplements in winter may have a lower Vitamin D level in winter than people who don’t get a lot of summer sun.

Dr. Galland’s conclusions are not surprising to those who have followed the Vitamin D story, for it’s a compelling one, as you’re about to learn should you continue reading this post and watch the long, but entertaining and informative video (below).

A Cancer and Heart Disease Fighter?

If Dr. Galland sounds like a strong proponent of Vitamin D, consider what Dr. Soram Khalsa wrote in this article about the Vitamin D-shortage epidemic (and the resulting deleterious effects) in this country today:

“As a board certified internist, I have chosen, for the last 30 years, to take a personalized approach in my practice of integrative medicine. I have worked with literally hundreds of herbs, vitamins and dietary supplements, to help my patients, often when drugs did not work. In all this time, I have not seen one nutritional supplement that has the power to affect human health as much as vitamin D. This is because Vitamin D is not actually a vitamin — it is a hormone that has the ability to interact and affect more than 2,000 genes in the body.

“… countless times I have had to deliver or discuss with a patient their sad and possibly terminal diagnosis. Diseases like cancer and heart disease are at best life altering, and most times life threatening. When I have this kind of difficult conversation with a patient, I often reflect that if their vitamin D level had been normal for the previous many years, maybe they would never have developed this disease.

“Ideally, your health care provider is your partner in exploring your vitamin D status, but patients usually do not want to visit their doctor just to ask for a vitamin D level, and many doctors are not yet up to date on the importance of vitamin D. If you use the at-home test kit and your blood level of vitamin D is low, I would encourage you to discuss this information with your physician.”

Sounds convincing, yes?

Well, there’s plenty more. Consider the following core dump of most of the benefits you’re likely to discover about Vitamin D, much of it presented by Dr. Michael Holick in his video below.

Cruise through the list and see if there’s anything there that’s meaningful to you, a loved one or friend.

After the video, I continue with the “Five Ways to Get Vitamin D”.

30 Reasons to Take Vitamin D

(My appreciation to one of my favorite health bloggers, Dr. Ben Kim for most of the list below.)

1. Vitamin D is essential to building and maintaining healthy bones, teeth, and muscles.
2. Without vitamin D, calcium can’t be absorbed. But if you get enough vitamin D, it can help you avoid osteoporosis, bone fractures and falling, which is a cause of morbidity among the elderly.
3. There is a strong association between vitamin D deficiency and increased risk of requiring a C-section.
4. In addition to taking a multivitamin (typically containing 400 IU of vitamin D) and getting some vitamin D from meals, pregnant women should be taking a minimum of 1000 IU of vitamin D per day.
5. If you give lactating women between 4000 and 6000 IUs of vitamin D per day, through breastfeeding alone, their babies can get all of the vitamin D that they need.
6. Infants need vitamin D at birth.
7. There aren’t too many foods that are naturally rich in vitamin D. Oily fish like wild salmon contain about 500 to 1000 IUs per serving (3.5 ounces), so you would have to eat salmon almost every day to barely get enough vitamin D to meet all of your needs.
8. Wild salmon get their vitamin D from the food chain, where it’s abundant. Food pellets that are fed to farmed salmon don’t contain vitamin D, so farmed salmon typically provide 100 to 250 IU of vitamin D per serving, which is only 10 to 25% of the vitamin D found in wild salmon.
9. In the summer, UV-B rays from the sun can create all of the vitamin D that we need if we get some exposure on our skin.
10. In the winter, the further away we get from the equator, the less chance we have of being exposed to UV-B rays to make vitamin D in our skin. For example, in Boston, you can make all the vitamin D that you need in the spring, summer, and fall months, but from about November to February, you can’t make any at all from sunlight exposure.
11. Above 35 degrees north latitude and below 35 degrees south, you can’t make any vitamin D from sunlight exposure from November to February.
12. Excessive exposure to sunlight increases risk of non-melanoma skin cancer, which is relatively easy to detect and treat if detected early enough.
13. Using a sunscreen with an SPF of 15 will decrease your ability to make vitamin D via sunlight exposure by 99%.
14. The key to responsible use of sunlight to ensure optimal vitamin D status is to make sure that you don’t get sunburned.
15. Getting enough sunlight (1 MED) to create a light pinkness in skin tone creates around 20,000 IU of vitamin D in your system.
16. Aging decreases our ability to produce vitamin D via sunlight. A 70-year old has a 70% reduced ability to produce vitamin D via sunlight compared to a 20-year old. So the older we get, the more likely it is that we will need to get some of our vitamin D from supplementation.
17. Obesity increases the need for vitamin D intake and/or creation via sunlight because storage of vitamin D in fat cells reduces the amount of vitamin D that’s available to the rest of the body.
18. You need vitamin D to effectively lose weight. Your insulin works better, and vitamin D helps you lose belly fat. Diabetes is also related to low vitamin D levels.
19. For most people and locations, during the summer, a good amount of sunlight exposure is 5 to 15 minutes on the arms and legs, two to three times a week. After this amount of time, sunscreen can be used to help prevent premature aging and increased risk of non-melanoma skin cancer.
20. People with darker skin tone need significantly more sunlight than Caucasians to produce optimal vitamin D levels. This is particularly true if you live much North, say, of Atlanta AND if you’re a woman over 45 years of age.
21. 21. The best blood test to assess vitamin D status is 25 hydroxy D.
22. Dr. Holick believes that most people (adults and kids) should be supplementing with a minimum of 1000 IU of vitamin D per day in addition to the vitamin D found in a multivitamin and a couple servings of foods that contain vitamin D.
23. Vitamin D deficiency is extremely common among all races, even in the summer.
24. Many people that exhibit symptoms of chronic fatigue syndrome and fibromyalgia may actually have osteomalacia, which is caused by vitamin D deficiency.
25. Higher levels of vitamin D (within the normal range) are associated with optimal lower extremity function (healthy bones and muscles in your legs).
26. Optimal vitamin D status reduces risk of fracture as you age.
27. You want your 25 hydroxy D level to be above 30 ng/ml. The optimal range is likely between 50 and 60 ng/ml.
28. For every 100 IU of vitamin D that you ingest, you raise your blood level by 1 ng/ml.
29. Optimal vitamin D status is associated with a decreased risk of breast, colon and prostate cancers.
30. Vitamin D improves blood flow by relaxing the blood vessels and lowering blood pressure.

Dr. Michael Holick: Diagnosis and Treatment of Vitamin D

Click here to view the embedded video.

So  now that – presumably – you’re convinced that Vitamin D is important for your health, here are

Five Ways to Get Vitamin D

1. 15 Minutes of Sun 3 Times Per Week
   You can get 10-15 minutes of high-noon sun exposure in warmer climates a few times a week. In the South you can do this all year long; but in the North it will work only in the summer months. But this is unrealistic for those who already wear sunscreen all day, or have been warned to stay out of the sun by their doctors.
2. Fatty Fish and Cod Liver Oil
   If you are one of those people who have been warned to stay out of the sun, another good natural source of Vitamin D is fatty fish, like salmon and in cod liver oil.
3. Fortified Dairy Products
   You also can get Vitamin D in fortified dairy products; however, there are only 100 units of Vitamin D per cup, so children and most adults would need at least four cups of dairy products per day. (Do you really want to ingest that much diary? Go for #5)
4. Multivitamin Supplements
   Although it varies by brand and the amount taken, most multivitamins have a substantial amount of vitamin D.
5. Vitamin D Supplements
   A good target is to take 1000 to 2000 international units of Vitamin D supplements every day. D3 is considered more potent and longer lasting, but if unavailable, both D2 and D3 are acceptable.  All versions are cheap and side effects are very rare.

I take Pro Health’s Vitamin D3.

Well, if you’ve stayed with me this long, you must be either my mother or an endurance mentat, but I thank you, nonetheless.

Related posts:

1. Vitamin D is Good, A Dozen to Avoid
2. Nine Reasons to Drink Green Tea (and limit coffee)
3. Supplements and Food that Protect Against Radiation Poisoning

Or, Why Women in China Don’t Get Breast Cancer. Thought provoking, it applies to men, too.

[Update: Research has also shown that Curcumin, the active ingredient in the common spice, Turmeric, has properties that also reduce the expression of these deadly molecules within cancer cells and can potentially slow the spread of breast cancer.  Story here.]

Chemist and Professor Jane Plant’s book excerpt (read below) about her battle with breast cancer, and discovery of links between breast and prostate cancer to dairy consumption, first appeared in early 2000.  It was soon picked up by bloggers (hmmm… seems I’m a bit late), and then some years later, got passed around via email. Today, it landed in my inbox.

I’ve read about the downside of dairy for some time now.

Things like “cow’s milk is for cows” which speaks to the fact that calf has four stomach compartments that enable it to property digest the milk sugars produced by its mother (who also has four stomach compartments).

Things like how dairy products are high in saturated fat (a contributor to heart disease and obesity) and often laced with antibiotics and growth hormones, the latter which are said to contribute to early menstruation in girls.

But the causal connection between dairy and cancer was new to me.  The fact that this was written by a scientist who had undergone four bouts of breast cancer made what she was saying particularly believable.

The excerpt below is compelling and should be read, so I won’t take all Dr. Plant’s thunder away except to say that her and her scientist husband’s research indicates that dairy products is a key factor in why Western Countries like America, have a dramatically higher of incidence of some cancers than countries that do not consume dairy products, such as Asian countries, like China.

Jane Plant is a respected scientist, who was made a CBE for her work in geochemistry.  Breast cancer struck her four times, an epic challenge that she describes briefly in the excerpt below from  her book, Your Life In Your Hands : Understanding, Preventing, and Overcoming Breast Cancer.

Professor Jane Plant:

I had no alternative but to die or to try to find a cure for myself. I am a scientist -  surely there was a rational explanation for this cruel illness that affects one in 12 women in the UK?

I had suffered the loss of one breast, and undergone radiotherapy. I was now receiving painful chemotherapy, and had been seen by some of the country’s most eminent specialists. But, deep down, I felt certain I was facing death.

I had a loving husband, a beautiful home and two young children to care for.  I desperately wanted to live. Fortunately, this desire drove me to unearth the facts, some of which were known only to a handful of scientists at the time.

Anyone who has come into contact with breast cancer will know that certain risk factors -  such as increasing age, early onset of womanhood, late onset of menopause and a family history of breast cancer -  are completely out of our control. But there are many risk factors, which we can control easily. These ‘controllable’ risk factors readily translate into simple changes that we can all make in our day-to-day lives to help prevent or treat breast cancer. My message is that even advanced breast cancer can be overcome because I have done it.

The first clue to understanding what was promoting my breast cancer came when my husband Peter, who was also a scientist, arrived back from working in China while I was being plugged in for a chemotherapy session.

He had brought with him cards and letters, as well as some amazing herbal suppositories, sent by my friends and science colleagues in China.

The suppositories were sent to me as a cure for breast cancer. Despite the awfulness of the situation, we both had a good belly laugh, and I remember saying that this was the treatment for breast cancer in China, then it was little wonder that Chinese women avoided getting the disease. Those words echoed in my mind. Why didn’t Chinese women get breast cancer? I had collaborated once with Chinese colleagues on a study of links between soil chemistry and disease, and I remembered some of the statistics.

The disease was virtually non-existent throughout the whole country. Only one in 10,000 women in China will die from it, compared to that terrible figure of one in 12 in Britain and the even grimmer average of one in 10 across most Western countries.

It is not just a matter of China being a more rural country, with less urban pollution. In highly urbanised Hong Kong, the rate rises to 34 women in every 10,000 but still puts the West to shame.

The Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki have similar rates. And remember, both cities were attacked with nuclear weapons, so in addition to the usual pollution-related cancers, one would also expect to find some radiation-related cases, too. The conclusion we can draw from these statistics strikes you with some force. If a Western woman were to move to industrialized, irradiated Hiroshima, she would stash her risk of contracting breast cancer by half.

Obviously this is absurd. It seemed obvious to me that some lifestyle factor not related to pollution, urbanization or the environment is seriously increasing the Western woman’s chance of contracting breast cancer.

I then discovered that whatever causes the huge differences in breast cancer rates between oriental and Western countries, it isn’t genetic. Scientific research showed that when Chinese or Japanese people move to the West, within one or two generations their rates of breast cancer approach those of their host community.

The same thing happens when oriental people adopt a completely Western lifestyle in Hong Kong. In fact, the slang name for breast cancer in China translates as ‘Rich Woman’s Disease’.  This is because, in China, only the better off can afford to eat what is termed ‘Hong Kong food’.

The Chinese describe all Western food, including everything from ice cream and chocolate bars to spaghetti and feta cheese, as ‘Hong Kong food’,  because of its availability in the former British colony and its scarcity, in the past, in mainland China.

So it made perfect sense to me that whatever was causing my breast cancer and the shockingly high incidence in this country generally, it was almost certainly something to do with our better-off, middle-class, Western lifestyle.

There is an important point for men here, too. I have observed in my research that much of the the data about prostate cancer leads to similar conclusions.

According to figures from the World Health Organization, the number of men contracting prostate cancer in rural China is negligible, only 0.5 men in every 100,000. In England, Scotland and Wales, however, this figure is 70 times higher.

Like breast cancer, it is a middle-class disease that primarily attacks the wealthier and higher socio-economic groups -  those that can afford to eat rich foods.

I remember saying to my husband– ‘Come on Peter, you have just come back from China. What is it about the Chinese way of life that is so different. Why don’t they get breast cancer?’

We decided to utilize our joint scientific backgrounds and approach it logically.  We examined scientific data that pointed us in the general direction of fats in diets.

Researchers had discovered in the 1980s that only l4 % of calories in the average Chinese diet were from fat, compared to almost 36% in the West. But the diet I had been living on for years before I contracted breast cancer was very low in fat and high in fibre.

Besides, I knew as a scientist that fat intake in adults has not been shown to increase risk for breast cancer in most investigations that have followed large groups of women for up to a dozen years.

Then one day something rather special happened. Peter and I have worked together so closely over the years that I am not sure which one of us first said: ‘The Chinese don’t eat dairy produce!’

It is hard to explain to a non-scientist the sudden mental and emotional ‘buzz’ you get when you know you have had an important insight.

It’s as if you have had a lot of pieces of a jigsaw in your mind, and suddenly, in a few seconds, they all fall into place and the whole picture is clear.

Suddenly I recalled how many Chinese people were physically unable to tolerate milk, how the Chinese people I had worked with had always said that milk was only for babies, and how one of my close friends, who is of Chinese origin, always politely turned down the cheese course at dinner parties.

I knew of no Chinese people who lived a traditional Chinese life who ever used cow or other dairy food to feed their babies. The tradition was to use a wet nurse but never, ever, dairy products.

Culturally, the Chinese find our Western preoccupation with milk and milk products very strange. I remember entertaining a large delegation of Chinese scientists shortly after the ending of the Cultural Revolution in the 1980s.

On advice from the Foreign Office, we had asked the caterer to provide a pudding that contained a lot of ice cream. After inquiring what the pudding consisted of, all of the Chinese, including their interpreter, politely but firmly refused to eat it, and they could not be persuaded to change their minds. At the time we were all delighted and ate extra portions!

Milk, I discovered, is one of the most common causes of food allergies.

Over 70% of the world’s population are unable to digest the milk sugar, lactose, which has led nutritionists to believe that this is the normal condition for adults, not some sort of deficiency. Perhaps nature is trying to tell us that we are eating the wrong food.

Before I had breast cancer for the first time, I had eaten a lot of dairy produce, such as skimmed milk, low-fat cheese and yoghurt. I had used it as my main source of protein. I also ate cheap but lean minced beef, which I now realized was probably often ground-up dairy cow.

In order to cope with the chemotherapy I received for my fifth case of cancer, I had been eating organic yoghurts as a way of helping my digestive tract to recover and repopulate my gut with ‘good’ bacteria.

Recently, I discovered that way back in 1989 yoghurt had been implicated in ovarian cancer. Dr Daniel Cramer of Harvard University studied hundreds of women with ovarian cancer, and had them record in detail what they normally ate.  I wish I’d been made aware of his findings when he had first discovered them.

Following Peter’s and my insight into the Chinese diet, I decided to give up not just yoghurt but all dairy produce immediately. Cheese, butter, milk and yoghurt and anything else that contained dairy produce -  it went down  the sink or in the rubbish.

It is surprising how many products, including commercial soups, biscuits and cakes, contain some form of dairy produce. Even many proprietary brands of margarine marketed as soya, sunflower or olive oil spreads can contain dairy produce.  I therefore became an avid reader of the small print on food labels.

Up to this point, I had been steadfastly measuring the progress of my fifth cancerous lump with callipers and plotting the results. Despite all the encouraging comments and positive feedback from my doctors and nurses, my own precise observations told me the bitter truth.

My first chemotherapy sessions had produced no effect -  the lump was still the same size.

Then I eliminated dairy products. Within days, the lump started to shrink.  About two weeks after my second chemotherapy session and one week after giving up dairy produce, the lump in my neck started to itch. Then it began to soften and to reduce in size. The line on the graph, which had shown no change, was now pointing downwards as the tumour got smaller and smaller.

And, very significantly, I noted that instead of declining exponentially (a graceful curve) as cancer is meant to do, the tumour’s decrease in size was plotted on a straight line heading off the bottom of the graph, indicating a cure, not suppression  (or remission) of the tumour.

One Saturday afternoon after about six weeks of excluding all dairy produce from my diet, I practised an hour of meditation then felt for what was left of the lump. I couldn’t find it.

Yet I was very experienced at detecting cancerous lumps -  I had discovered all five cancers on my own. I went downstairs and asked my husband to feel my neck. He could not find any trace of the lump either.

On the following Thursday I was due to be seen by my cancer specialist at Charing Cross Hospital in London.

He examined me thoroughly, especially my neck where the tumour had been.  He was initially bemused and then delighted as he said, “I cannot find it.’ None of my doctors, it appeared, had expected someone with my type and stage of cancer (which had clearly spread to the lymph system) to survive, let alone be so hale and hearty.

My specialist was as overjoyed as I was. When I first discussed my ideas with him he was understandably skeptical. But I understand that he now uses maps showing cancer mortality in China in his lectures, and recommends a non-dairy diet to his cancer patients.

I now believe that the link between dairy produce and breast cancer is similar to the link between smoking and lung cancer. I believe that identifying the link between breast cancer and dairy produce, and  then developing a diet specifically targeted at maintaining the health of my breast and hormone system, cured me.

It was difficult for me, as it may be for you, to accept that a substance as ‘natural’ as milk might have such ominous health implications.  But I am a living proof that it works and, starting from tomorrow, I shall reveal the secrets of my revolutionary action plan.

There’s much information on the Web about the dairy link to cancer.  There are studies that both support and reject the hypothesis.  Two in support are:

http://www.cancerproject.org/ask/dairy.php

Doctor’s studies links dairy to cancer risk

A countervailing view is here:  Meat, Dairy Won’t Up Odds for Breast Cancer

Related posts:

1. Is the Pink Ribbon Breast Cancer Campaign Effective? Listen.
2. Dr. Oz on Preventing Breast Cancer (Watch Video)
3. The Seriously Serious Problems of Obesity, Cancer and Obesity