Soy Phytoestrogens and the Art of Propaganda
In this newsletter we will discuss the current controversy about soy phytoestrogens. The established literature to date is replete with studies that find soy phytoestrogens beneficial to disease prevention including prevention of breast cancer. There is, however, some current literature coming from a publication know as Nexus Magazine which, for the most part, parrots the "literature" from the Weston A. Price Foundation. I have attempted to present this literature as I have found it.
A brief look at Weston and the Foundation ...
The Weston A Price Foundation today is composed mostly of farmers and denies any relationship with any of the current beef and dairy lobbies or corporations.
Dr. Price was a dentist who died in 1948. He traveled the world studying the teeth of tribes far removed from civilization and made some correct observations about dental cavities and western eating habits. He extrapolated them to aging in general and, to some degree, he was correct. I totally agree that western eating habits cause premature aging and are responsible for most, if not all, of the epidemic of lifestyle disease we see today. When he died in 1948 the country was then just being taken over by the beef and dairy lobbies and a lot of important research regarding the dangers of meat and dairy had not been done. However, now some fifty six or so years later, we have a "foundation" that advocates meat and dairy even though Weston himself did not advocate dairy. I quote from one of the sites about him:
"These primitives with their fine bodies, homogeneous reproduction, emotional stability and freedom from degenerative ills stand forth in sharp contrast to those subsisting on the impoverished foods of civilization--sugar, white flour, Pasteurized milk and convenience foods filled with extenders and additives."
However, in addition to the Foundation's promotion of the ingestion of meat, there is even a movement from the "Foundation" that is suggesting that we drink whole unprocessed milk. Unpasteurized milk caused a lot of bovine type tuberculosis at one point, not to mention the risk today of transmitting Mad Cow Disease. This is the reason that milk was then, as it is today, Pasteurized. I think that movie has already been played once. Reminds me of being in Brown County, Indiana with my father who was a physician. His friend, Jim Huntsman, wanted to give me some unpasteurized milk and my father said no, politely ... but no. No discussion of milk is complete without mentioning the late Dr. John Oski, head of the Department of Pediatrics of Johns Hopkins when he wrote, "Don't Drink Your Milk." Another book on milk by Jane Heimlich "Milk, the Deadly Poison" is another good read.
Perhaps one of the remote tribes that I don't think Weston had the occasion to meet are the Bantu of Africa.
"The African Bantu woman provides an excellent example of good health. Her diet is free of milk and still provides 250 to 400 mg of calcium from plant sources, which is half the amount consumed by Western women. Bantu women commonly have 10 babies during their life and breast feed each of them for about ten months. But even with this huge calcium drain and relatively low calcium intake, osteoporosis is relatively unknown among these women."
John McDougall, M.D.
This quote from Suzanne Havala, R.D.
"There is no human requirement for milk from a cow." Suzanne Havala, R.D. author of the American Dietetic Association's Position Paper on Vegetarian Diets
We would all like to think that Weston, if he was alive today and was as smart as they say he was, would look at the China study and the rest of the current information available today and realize that animal protein in any amount, from any source, is detrimental to one's health.
Now, for some of the "studies" that form the basis for the "soy alert."
We picked some of these studies at random from all the studies listed that "support" the soy alert from Nexus Magazine and The Weston A Price Foundation. We could have gone on literally for many days, if not months.
2002 Lephard ED and others. Neurobehavioral effects of dietary soy phytoestrogens.
Neurotoxicol Teratol 2002 Jan-Feb;24(1):5-16. Male mice fed diets rich in phytoestrogens had lower levels of maze performance than male mice fed diets free of phytoestrogens. (Opposite results were observed in female mice.) The results indicate that consumption of dietary phytoestrogens resulting in very high plasma isoflavone levels (in many cases over a relatively short interval of consumption in adulthood) can significantly alter sexually dimorphic brain regions, anxiety, learning and memory.
This one is really exemplary of the typical academic study that has been tailored to fit the "researchers" desired outcome. First, we are using extracted phytoestrogens. Before this study can even be discussed we need to know how the phytoestrogens were extracted and what "chemicals" were used to do so. Many laboratory extraction processes involve the use of very carcinogenic organic solvents. Second, the study was done in rats with an isolated isoflavone (phytoestrogen). Third, the researchers found by their own admission that the exact opposite effects happened in female rats, as opposed to the male rats. This data was conveniently ignored since it did not fit what the "researcher" had designed the study for. As is well known in Medicine and Research -any study can be tailored to have any outcome.
2003 Gardner-Thorpe D and others. Dietary supplements of soya flour lower serum testosterone concentrations and improve markers of oxidative stess in men. Eur J Clin Nutr 2003 Jan;57(1):100-6.
In a study carried out at University Hospital of Wales, male volunteers ate three scones per day in addition to their normal diet for a period of six weeks. The scones were made either with wheat flour or soy flour providing 120 mg per day of isoflavones (about the amount contained in 3 cups of soy milk). Researchers noted "significant improvements in two of the three markers of oxidative stress" and concluded that "these findings provide a putative mechanism by which soya supplements could protect against prostatic disease and atherosclerosis. However, testosterone levels fell in the volunteers eating the soy but researchers did not stress this alarming finding in their conclusion.
This study shows that actually soya flour, as they call it, did provide some protection against prostatic disease and atherosclerosis. Again, listen to the commentary, the researchers did not stress the lowering of the testosterone levels. A polite Duh ... Why would they? The mechanism for the improved health in the volunteers is most likely the lowering of testosterone, much the same as breast cancer rates go down with decreasing estrogen levels in the female. Not to mention that Nexus advocates eating heavily estrogen laden beef in place of whole organic soy products. What sense does this make to you? Apply the rule of common sense here ... if the results don't make sense to the authors they simply twist it around and try to "buffalo" the reader into a "false" conclusion.
2003 Hartley DC and others. The soya isoflavone content of rat diet can increase anxiety and stress hormone release in the male rat. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 2003 Apr ;167(1) :46-53.
This report begins with the following statement: "Isoflavones form one of the main classes of phytoestrogens and have been found to exert both oestrogenic and anti-oestrogenic effects on the central nervous system. The effects have not been limited to reproductive behaviour, but include effects on learning and anxiety and actions on the hypothalamo-pituitary axis." Noting that most rat chow contains soy, investigators compared the behavior of rats given isoflavones in their diets with those on an isoflavone-free diet. Rats fed isoflavones spent significantly less time in active social interaction and had significantly elevated stress-induced corticosterone concentrations. The conclusion: "Major changes in behavioural measures of anxiety and in stress hormones can result from the soya isoflavone content of rat diet. These changes are as striking as those seen following drug administration and could form an important source of variation between laboratories."
This study really doesn't prove anything. We have no idea how much isolated isoflavones were used and what relevance this study may have to whole organic soy products and human beings is not clear.
Another "scientific" relevation from the Foundation on cholesterol.
"Read Dr. Ravnskov´s thought-provoking paper -High cholesterol may protect against infections and atherosclerosis, recently published in the prestigious Quarterly Journal of Medicine. "
I especially like this one from the Nexus site. Dr. Ravnskov's thought provoking paper is really thought provoking -is the good doctor brain dead? I'm sorry but here I have an ally in conventional medicine -The American College of Cardiology. I have been in medicine since 1965 having graduated from Indiana Medical School in 1969. I have never occasioned the prestigious Quarterly Journal of Medicine, although I frequently saw the New England Journal, Internal Medicine and the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.
The position of the American College of Cardiology, as long as I have been around to be aware of it, has been that high cholesterol is not good. I'm sorry here folks -but I'll go with the ACC.
The Art of Propaganda!
The next three paragraphs are from "Soy and the Brain" from the Weston A PriceFoundation.
"Soybeans grown in the United States contain residues of the pesticide dieldrin, an organochlorine similar to DDT. Although both chemicals were banned in the 1970s, dieldrin still persists in soils and is absorbed through the roots. Today it is the most toxic residue found on domestic soybeans.22 In Silent Spring, Rachel Carson warned that dieldrin is nearly 50 times as poisonous as DDT. In addition to disrupting hormones, it can have long delayed neurological effects, ranging from loss of memory to mania.23 Chinese aphids were recently discovered in fields scattered across Wisconsin, so increased pesticide applications are likely.
Combinations of insecticides, weed killers, and artificial fertilizerseven at low levelshave measurable detrimental effects on thyroid and other hormones as well as on the brain.24 EPA scientists now want to upgrade the commonly used herbicide, atrazine, to a likely carcinogen. In animal tests, atrazine attaches to sites on the hypothalamus, a crucial brain region involved with regulating levels of stress and sex hormones.25
Individuals newly diagnosed with Parkinsons disease were more than twice as likely to have been exposed to insecticides in their home, compared to those without the disease.26 In September 2000, The Lancet reported that farmers and gardeners regularly exposed to pesticides may have more than five times the risk of developing mild cognitive dysfunction."
Read these carefully as they are good examples of the art of propaganda. Includea litte truth to disarm the reader in the midst of your propaganda. No one will dispute that soybeans grown in America are "loaded" with pesticides. The implication is that the non-organically grown soybean and the rest of soy products such as tofu, tempeh and infant fomula, have higher concentrations of these pesticides than meat, or even more unbelievable, that meat raised in America doesn't have any of these pesticide residues. Stop and ask yourself "Where do these heavily pesticided soybeans go?" At least 80-90% of all the commercially grown soybeans are -fed to cattle(we could feed the world population if we didn't feed all of our farm production to animals so that we can eat them). Stop again and ask yourself "how much fat does your average soybean have as compared to your average cow, free range or otherwise? Your average soybean is 10% or less fat while the leanest "cut" of meat is at least 40% fat. The cow wins by a landslide. Now for a little biochemistry -toxic pesticides are organic compounds that "bioconcentrate" in fat, animal fat, your fat or any fat -period. See Louis Regenstein "How to Survive in America the Poisoned."
This is pure propaganda from the Weston A. Price Foundation. They start out with a "nugget" of truth and follow it with a sea of propaganda. Yes, Weston did make some real observations regarding cavities and western eating habits. He even, to some degree, extended these to aging in general. Once again as we learn from the study of propaganda -all propaganda must have a kernel of truth somewhere. However, think for a minute -how much pesticide residue will you get from the soybean itself as compared to the amount in even a small portion of animal fat that has bioconcentrated all the pesticides it was fed during its whole life into its fat? Compare either of these to what you will get from eating whole organic tofu. That is a no brainer. The MericleDiet and DrMericle.com has at its very initial premise that all food eaten, especially here in America, needs to be organic. The second premise is that at least one meal a day must be from only whole foods, preferably vegan and sugar free.
To visit the MericleDiet:
http://www.DrMericle.com/fscook3c.phpTo visit DrMericle.com:
http://www.DrMericle.comThe Hawaii aging study was flawed because a significant number of the participants who were lost to follow up were included in the final results. This was from the Hawaii Cancer Research Center.
Most of the studies that overpopulate the WWW today incriminating soy as being like diethylstilbesterol were done with commercially grown soybeans and their extracts. DES was banned quite a while ago but the black market for DES in commercial livestock operations -is alive and well. Nothing fattens a poor tortured animal like DES. Once again, time for a brain check -phytoestrogens have been shown to be beneficial to the human in many studies. DES never has. The amount of DES in organic tofu is zero. Are we are to believe that heavily pesticided meat is a better choice than soy products ...based on these "studies?" I am amazed that anyone who is intellectually honest can recommend heavily pesticided meat as being better than organic soy products under any circumstance. "How you got to teach a course in anything is simply amazing." Marshall McLuan in Woody Allen's Annie Hall.
On a more personal basis.
I mention this (not to brag) but in reference to this statement made once again on the Weston A. Price Foundation site that soy products can: "have adverse effects on the brain during development and throughout life."
My ex-wife and I raised five mostly vegan children. The youngest doesn't even remember ever drinking milk. Between these five children are eleven degrees, five at the B.A. levels and six Masters. The four girls were home schooled. The older two started the University of Arizona at 15 and 16 years old. The 15 year old graduated Magna Cum Laude (one of her Masters is from Oxford) and the 16 year old Cum Laude (she just got her Masters in History from the University of Arizona). Of the two younger girls one has her Masters in Photography and the other should complete hers this June. Our son has a degree in Classical Guitar, did Pike's Peak Ascent when he was ten years old and still has the second fastest age ten time in all of Arizona for the ten kilometer distance. These children were all raised vegan in a house with running parents and NO television.
My ex-wife is now ten years post discovery of a hypoechoic irregular mass in her left breast that had psammomatous-like calcifications. Unfortunately, she continued to eat dairy longer than anyone else (much like a famous rock star's wife who was vegetarian but continued to eat cheese). For the past ten years she has eaten completely organic, vegan and sugar free and continues to eat organic tofu and tempeh regularly. She still has her left breast and the lesion has decreased to about one-half its original size but the skin retraction is still there. Basically the lesion is stable. This "ancedotal" series of one is, however, still a series of one. When and if there is some valid research that incriminates whole organic soy, we will consider stopping it.
Common Sense Conclusions:
No valid research has been done regarding the ingestion of whole organic soy food products. Until there is some -I will go with what solid, well conducted studies we already have.
T. Colin Campbell's thirty-five plus year old China Study is the only significant study done to date that adequately examines the relationship between diet and human health.
This quote from Dr. Campbell ...
"In the next 10 to 15 years, one of the things you're bound to hear is that animal protein ... is one of the most toxicnutrients of all that can be considered . Risk for disease goes up dramatically when even a little animal protein is added to the diet." T. Colin Campbell Ph.D. (Author of The China Study).
To visit the Bookstore at DrMericle.com where you can view Dr. Campbell's book and other books mentioned in this article:
http://www.DrMericle.com/fslibrary.phpThe Chinese have been eating tofu and tempeh for a lot longer than we have been eating meat. Their incidence of cancer and vascular (heart and stroke) disease doesn't go up until they start to eat beef and dairy.
What to do from here.
If you are concerned in the least about whole organic soy products then don't eat them. It's that simple.
Don't utilize extracted soy products. We don't know if it is the extraction process or the isolates themselves that could cause a problem. Common sense dictates eat your food as Mother Nature intends -whole.
As the MericleDiet has always advocated -always eat organic and whole.
I will continue to eat organic tofu and tempeh as I have for over some 27 years.
One last study on the plus side of soy just so you can see the difference.
A randomized trial to prevent hormonal patterns at high risk for breast cancer: the DIANA (Diet and Androgens) project.Berrino F., Secreto G., Camerini E., Bellati C., Maffei F., Pala V., Allegro G., Venturelli E., Cavalleri A., Rinaldi S., Oldani S., Fissi R., Campa T., Magni A., Kaaks R.*, Catania S.**, Gastaldi S.*** , Ricciuti A.*** and Burrone A.*** Istituto Nazionale Tumori, Via Venezian 1, Milan, Italy; *International Agency for Research on Cancer,150 Cours A. Thomas Lyon, France; **Ospedale San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy; ***Association "Attivecomeprima", Via Livigno 3, Milan, Italy;
Recent prospective studies with biological banking have proven beyond reasonable doubt that post-menopausal breast cancer is preceded by high serum levels of sex steroid hormones, both androgens and estrogens, especially of their bioavailable fraction, i.e. the fraction not linked to the sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG) (Toniolo et al, JNCI 1995; Berrino et al, JNCI 1996; Dorgan et al, Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev, 1966). Several in vitro and in vivo studies have suggested that both sex hormone levels and breast cancer risk can be reduced through dietary manipulation (Adlercreutz, Scand J Clin Lab Invest, 1990; Messina et al, Nutr Cancer, 1994).
We have hypothesized that a comprehensive modification of western diet for the prevention of breast cancer should include: 1) phytoestrogen rich foods, such as traditional soyfoods, other legumes, flaxseed, whole cereals, seaweeds, various seeds, berries and nuts and cruciferous vegetables, which may stimulate SHBG synthesis and modify sex hormones metabolism; 2) low glycemic index food, such as unrefined cereals and legumes, in order to decrease insulin level, which inhibits SHBG synthesis and may stimulate androgen production; 3) factors enhancing insulin sensitivity, such as omega-3 fatty acids, vegetable fibers, vitamin B6, chromium; and 4) less animal fat (except omega-3) and refined carbohydrates in order to reduce body fat and waist to hip ratio, associated with high sex hormones and low SHBG levels.
We have carried out a randomized trial on 104 voluntary post-menopausal healthy women, aged 50 to 65, living in Milan (Northern Italy), at high risk of breast cancer because of high serum testosterone level (above the upper tertile of the distribution) 52 of them were randomized to follow for 4.5 months the diet outlined above, based on mediterranean and macrobiotic recipes, without any recommendation to reduce total food intake, and 52 to follow their usual diet. Compliance with the protocol was 98%. Fasting blood was collected at baseline and after 2 and 4.5 months of intervention and serum was preserved at -80(inf)C to be analyzed for hormones in the same RIA assays. Serum testosterone decreased significantly in the diet group (-18,3%) compared to the control group (-7.0%, P=0.006), and SHBG increased (23.4% versus 4.1%, P=0.000). Dietary intervention also significantly decreased total cholesterol (-13.6% versus -4.6% among controls), body weight (-4 kg versus -0.6 kg) and waist circumference (-3.8 versus -0.4 cm). Other hormonal assays are being carried out.
Thanks for your time ...
Copyright J. Mericle M.D. 2005 All Rights Reserved
Five Serious Dangers of Low Carbohydrate Diets
Five Serious Dangers of Low Carbohydrate Diets
Cancer.
Coronary heart disease.
Stroke.
Osteoporosis.
Major depression from brain "starvation."
Headlines.WASHINGTON, Jun 22, 2004 (United Press International via COMTEX) -- A coalition of nutrition, public health and consumer groups is calling on U.S. residents to beware of the dangers of low-carb diets. The newly formed Partnership for Essential Nutrition said Tuesday that low-carb diets are unlikely to lead to sustained long term weight loss, and they can increase the risk for a number of life-threatening medical conditions.
"Low-carbohydrate diets conflict with decades of solid scientific research that clearly encourages us to reduce saturated fat and boost fruit, vegetable and fiber intake," said Barbara Moore, Ph.D., president and CEO of Shape Up America!, which founded the coalition. The coalition said losing weight on these extreme low-carb diets can lead to such serious health problems as kidney stress, liver disorders and gout. These diets also increase the risk for coronary heart disease, diabetes, stroke and several types of cancer, plus side effects: severe constipation, gastrointestinal problems, nausea, repeated headaches, difficulty in concentrating and the loss of energy. Copyright 2004 by United Press International.
THE OBSERVER , LONDON Monday, Sep 22, 2003, Page 7
The first official warning about the dangers of the Atkins diet has been issued by the British Government amid concern about the rising number of people opting for the high-fat, high-protein regime. The Food Standards Agency, which is responsible for all the Government's nutritional guidance, has published a statement alerting the public to the health risks of low-carbohydrate diets, including the Atkins diet, claiming that they are linked to heart disease, cancer and even obesity.
ORLANDO, Florida (CNN) -- The American Heart Association has drafted an advisory paper warning the public about what it says are the dangers of high-protein diets. "They put people at risk for heart disease and we're really concerned about that," said Dr. Robert H. Eckel, senior author of the paper. "Long-term, the saturated fat and cholesterol content of the diet will raise the ... bad cholesterol and increase the risk for cardiovascular disease, particularly heart attacks."
Discussion: One of the main goals of the so-called "low-carb" diets is to reduce the amount of insulin secreted into your bloodstream. This is a valid and noble goal. The only problem is that eating a lot of protein is not the answer. Excessive protein in the diet of a human causes all the above and more. If one studies the evolution of the human we can find out that the insulin/glucagon mechanism is a rather well engineered system for allowing the human to survive. As man evolved there would be rather long periods without food. In order to survive these periods man would call his insulin into action and have it store all the energy it could find available in his body. These periods could be as long as several days. Then when he needed to perform some work or forage for more food he would utilize his glucagon to utilize all the energy that the insulin had stored for him.
It is not wise to ignore evolutionary biochemistry -man's biochemistry still remains and will be forever "Anachronistically Neanderthal."
This is evolutionary biochemistry at its best. What's wrong with this picture? As man and "civilization" has progressed to the "concept" of three squares and snacks everyday -man's biochemistry is still anachronistically Neanderthal. We have the biochemistry of the evolutionary man "mixed" with the age of fast convenience foods. We may not like the idea but man was "never" meant to eat three squares a day plus snacks. Man will do quite nicely on just one meal a day with no snacks. When you take some rather elegant evolutionary biochemistry like the insulin/glucagon system and abuse it by making it an "insulin only" system you are defying the biochemistry of the human.
Excessive Insulin can be Hazardous to your Health!
The "excessive insulin" is linked to many of our lifestyle diseases, especially those listed above. The answer is not to ingest protein to lower insulin -the answer is to ingest less food, reduce the number of daily feedings and make sure to ingest mother nature's balance. That is 75% complex carbohydrate, 15% protein and 10% fat. The dangers of animal protein are well documented by the "China Study." Probably the best and easily the longest nutritional study ever conducted is the China Study by T. Colin Campbell. This study demonstrates a linear relationship between animal protein ingestion and cancer, coronary artery disease and stroke. That meat causes osteoporosis is well documented in John Robbins "Diet for a New America."
Meat contains NO carbohydrate!
That the brain can only utilize glucose for energy has been well documented. Meat contains no carbohydrate and it is no wonder that so many Atkin's dieters are really depressed.
Once again from T. Colin Campbell ...
"In the next 10 to 15 years, one of the things you're bound to hear is that animal protein ... is one of the most toxic nutrients of all that can be considered . Risk for disease goes up dramatically when even a little animal protein is added to the diet." T. Colin Campbell Ph.D.
Conclusion: Just say an emphatic and resounding NO to "low-carb."
To visit the MericleDiet -a safe and sensible no hunger weight loss program.
http://www.drmericle.com/fscook3c.phpCopyright J. Mericle M.D. 2004 All Rights Reserved
The True Role of Exercise in Weight Loss
Exercise in not a reliable part of any effective weight loss program.
Don't get me wrong! It is not that I don't believe in exercising. Right now I am in the 26th year of a running streak that started back in the middle of December 1979. My minimum run is 4 miles or 30 minutes everyday and for the past two years I have extended the minimum time to 40 minutes. So far my streak is still intact having run through several illnesses and even a fracture of my right fifth metatarsal. I personally think that running is even more important when you are injured or sick since the run is always the best part of any day when you are sick. The only time I think that I would not recommend exercise would be if you had viral myocarditis.
Exercise is a very important part of staying healthy. For those lucky enough to have no biomechanical impediment to running -running is easily the best. Bad knees, backs and a host of other problems can keep you from running. Cycling and swimming are good alternatives, especially swimming since it is safe and not biomechanically injurious since the body is supported in water. Cycling is a really great form of exercise but I have yet to ride anywhere where I really felt safe being on a bicycle with a lot of much larger cars and trucks. Running works the best largely because it gets you the most exercise in the least amount of time and is also one of the cheapest forms of exercise -only occasionally requiring some new shoes and shorts. Thirty minutes or so of exercise three times a week is a good place to start and build from there. Exercise is very good for the immune system and daily core temperature elevation really helps to keep one from getting all the nasty flu's and colds that travel the country every year.
"Exercise is only icing on the cake of proper nutrition." I actually put on weight while training for the 1985 Hawaii Ironman doing three workouts a day. After the 1984 Ironnman I was weighing 135 pounds and by the time I was treading water under the flags at the start of the 1985 version, I was weighing 145 pounds -ten pounds heavier in one year. Nice to have the extra flotation on the swim but forget trying to carry the extra weight up and down 112 miles of continuous hills back and forth to Havi and then have to run 26. 2 miles in the heat with this extra weight, which also acted as an additional layer of insulation -the last thing you need in the heat of the Kona lava fields.
Like it or not, the human body is very good at adapting to increased work loads. It does this by becoming more efficient and utilizing your ingested fuels better. The typical story is that with an increased work load such as starting to run or bicycle, you lose weight rapidly during the first several months. Then after your body adapts to the new work load you soon find yourself putting the weight back on, much to your chagrin. If you continue to overeat you will then continue to put weight on despite continuing with the same exercise load.
I saw this every day sitting at the trailhead of the Monon path in Indianapolis. Many people going out for six mile runs and longer bicyles carrying so much extra weight. Even without the usual post-exercise goodies that people often indulge in, they still carry excessive weight and never get rid of it. Sometimes they even get frustrated and quit. Just look in the classified under used exercise equipment. What I have learned the hard way is when you are making a serious dietary change it is often best to just do one thing at a time. Don't worry about exercise. Not that the exercise won't be beneficial but it should not be your priority. If you make the dietary changes that are advocated in the MericleDiet you will lose weight and feel better. Once you learn how much better you can feel and that you do not have to be hungry all the time, then exercise really becomes a pleasant experience since it is so much easier to exercise when you are not carrying a lot of extra baggage and your metabolism is in better shape. This latter point is extremely important.
Do not rely on exercise to lose weight. I have to catch myself all the time. I'll start to put on a few pounds and the first thing my mind tells me is to exercise more ie, run more mileage. After many years of doing just that I have learned that it seldom works. Very few people can actually increase their weekly mileage to get to the point where it will reduce your weight before the increased appetite from all that mileage increases your weight. The math is really firm on this one. Eat too much food or drink too much beer and voila -up goes your weight. It's pure mathematics and biochemistry.
When your weight goes up -decrease your food intake. I can't change it nor can you. Now when my weight starts on an upward trend I still will say run more ... then catch myself and then say ... just don't eat so much or more often than not -cut down on the beers. Sometimes I'll even decrease my mileage and lose weight by cutting down on my food intake. Even as well as I eat, it is easy for me to still eat way (weigh) too much food and put on weight. Unless you are young, training for the Marathon and living at elevation doing 100+ mile weeks -you are not going to run or exercise off any weight on a permanent basis. Always try to think when your weight goes up -I must be eating too much food and work on trying to decrease the amount of food you are eating.
To visit DrMericle.com:
http://www.DrMericle.comTo visit the the MericleDiet:
http://www.DrMericle.com/fscook3c.php
Sugar, Vitamin C and Competitive Inhibition
Carboloading of a different variety.
Saturday in Tucson before the 1982 version of the Tucson Marathon we were sitting on the Gentle Ben's patio with some of our running friends from Albuquerque having some carbohydrates of the liquid variety. Bob Pratt would consume 18 Dos Equis and run a blazing 2:31 marathon the next day. Sitting at another table was one of Tucson's running greats, Dr. Tom R. Tom at one time had run a 2:21 marathon which was near world class at that time. Tom was loading yet a different variety -a cheeseburger. He would not run as fast as Bob Pratt the next day and would not run up to his amazing capability.
The battle over vitamin C.
At the 1978 version of the Fiesta Bowl marathon in Phoenix I was lucky enough to hear Dr. Thomas Bassler speak. When it came to running injuries he recommended vitamin C. I had been running 100 mile weeks in preparation and was aching all over. That day I got a bottle of vitamin C and ran the next day withno pain at all. I have been using vitamin C ever since with good results. The battle, however, would rage on. Dr. R never took vitamin C since he believed that it did not do any good since most of it he said "would be excreted in the urine." Dr. Bassler, on the other hand, stated emphatically that you should not run if you don't supplement vitamin C. My own experience has verified the latter, on an ongoing basis for all of my 25 year and one month running streak.
Does the human body need supplemental vitamin C?
Before we go any further let's try to establish first whether or not the body needs vitamin C from outside sources, ie foods, drinks or supplements. To do this, we will take a brief look at the biochemistry of vitamin C from Stryer's Biochemistry Fourth Edition. Collagen is the major protein of connective tissue such as the Achille's tendon or the ligaments and tendons of the knee. Without going into a lot of biochemical detail, ( vitamin C "ascorbate" is necessary for the formation of hydroxyproline and itis hydroxyproline that stabilizes collagen) vitamin C is crucial for the proper synthesis of collagen. Primates (you and me) are unable to synthesize vitamin C. We have to get it from outside sources.
The first observation of scurvy.
Scurvy was first noticed in 1536 by Jacques Cartier when it afflicted his men who were exploring the Saint Lawrence River.
"Some did lose all their strength, and could not stand on their feet ...Others also had all their skins spotted with spots of blood of a purple colour: then did it ascend up to their ankles, knees, thighs, shoulders, arms, and necks. Their mouths became stinking,their gums so rotten, that all the flesh did fall off, even to the roots of the teeth, which did also almost all fall out."
This is one of the earliest descriptions of the disease scurvy.The preventative for this was later discovered by a Scottish physician, Dr. James Lind, in 1753. He recommended greens or fresh vegetables and ripe fruits. He urged the inclusion of lemon juice in the sailors' diets. This was ingored for forty years but finally the admiralty took his advice and lemon juice was included in the sailors' diets. Lime juice was later substituted. Hence the British sailors became known as "limeys."
There is no question -the human body does need vitamin C.
There is no doubt today that the human cannot synthesize vitamin C and does have to obtain it from outside sources. Now that we have established the need for vitamin C, let's look at how much vitamin C we need. According to Dr. R we didn't need any additional supplementation outside of what we got in our normal food sources. According to Dr. Bassler you had to supplement vitamin C especially if you were running since running is a stress both on the connective tissues of the body but also a stress on the whole body. Emotional stress is another time for supplementation of vitamin C since any stress at all releases vitamin C into the bloodstream from the tissues and soon it is excreted in the urine. The more stress you have to deal with the more vitamin C you will need to supplement. Yes, extracellular vitamin C will be excreted in the urine if it is not driven back into the cells very quickly.
Vitamin C and the immune system.
One of the earlier proponents of vitamin C was Dr. Linus Pauling,whose work demonstrated that the body's white blood cells needed high levels of vitamin C "inside the cell" to fight infection. Thus, he recommended high doses of supplemental vitamin C to fight the common cold. And, both he and Dr. Bassler clearly emphasized that there was no magical dose -you just took vitamin C until you got better. Dr. Bassler recommended 2 grams every two hours for running injuries until they quit hurting. I have done that and it works.
The phagocytic index, sugar, insulin and competitive inhibition.
Having utilized vitamin C for well over 25 years I have often been asked how much should I take and often wondered myself about the dosage levels. This really became apparent when, after discovering my own adult onset diabetes in July 1997, I quit sugar. My vitamin C dosage level to maintain my body for 50-100 mile running weeks plummeted. I was startled to discover that the amount I needed after I quit sugar was about one quarter of what it had been while I was still ingesting sugar. Now in this interesting discussion is the answer.
The more sugar you ingest -the more vitamin C you will need.
The molecules of vitamin C, glucose and fructose very closly resemble each other. If you are skeptical of this, it is a very interesting exercise to check out their molecular structures (in Stryer vitamin C is on page 455 and sucrose, glucose and fructose are on page 471). When you get a cold or other infection white blood cells and macrophages go to work to rid the body of the invading bacteria or virus. Insulin transports the vitamin C into these cells so that they can scurry around and rid the body of the infectious agent. The real problem arises when one ingests any sugar at all. If there is more glucose(sugar) around than there is vitamin C, insulin will preferentially allow the sugar to enter the cell. A blood sugar level of only 120 mg/ml (normal fasting blood sugar should be 100 mg/ml or less) will reduce the phagocytic index (an index of the cell's ability to rid the body of the bacteria or virus) by a whopping 75%. Loosely translated, your immune system slows to a crawl. This is known as "competitive inhibition" ie one molecule competes for the same spot to get into the cell with another similar appearing but biochemically different molecule. The molecule that is preferred(in this case glucose) inhibits the entry of the other molecule (in this case vitamin C).
The more sugar you ingest -the more vitamin C you will need to fight infection or keep your connective tissues (tendons and ligaments etc) intact. One should also be aware of the two signs of too much vitamin C, headache and diarrhea. I can't really count the number of times that I would get a headache about the same time, or just after, the running injury I was treating in myself would quit hurting.
Why orange juice is not a good source of vitamin C.
Over all these years and battles (discussions) about the need for supplemental vitamin C I have heard many times "Oh, I just drink lots of orange juice." The problem with orange juice is that in addition to the vitamin C it also contains large amounts of sugar. The more you drink the more sugar you ingest. You may also be getting some vitamin C but that vitamin C will probably never find its way into the white blood cells and macrophages because its entry into the cell will be competitively inhibited by all the sugar. Lemon juice and lime juice would be better sources since they do not contain as much sugar. Optimally you would not consume the juice but the whole fruit as mother natured intended. It would also help to eat a diet high in organic vitamin C rich foods (such as theMericleDiet) and supplement vitamin C as needed. You would also want to take into consideration how much sugar you ingest and adjust your supplemental dose accordingly.
To visit the MericleDiet / Easy Vegetarian Cooking
http://www.DrMericle.com/fscook3c.phpConclusions:
The human body has to have vitamin C from outside sources.
The dose is different for different individuals but the concept that supplementing vitamin C is a waste of money because "it all goes out in the urine" is completely flawed and has no basis in human biochemistry.
Linus Pauling was correct in stating that you should take vitaminC as a supplement until the cold or flu abates. This concept was then and still is -biochemically correct.
Once competitive inhibition of vitamin C's entry into the cell by glucose was established then the explanation for the large variance in "doses that work" is explained.
There is no "magical" dose of vitamin C.
The more sugar you ingest the more vitamin C you will need to supplement.
Supplemental vitamin C is a well founded concept and has a solid basis in human biochemistry.
Post Script.
I haven't heard much lately from Bob Pratt other than he was either winning or coming in second at the Pike's Peak Ascent. The last time I saw Dr. R he was in a full length leg cast for an anterior cruciate tear in his knee. I am in the 25th year of my running streak (minimun 4 miles or 30 minutes every day) and just completed a six mile run this morning. My vitamin C dose is down to about 1 gram a day and I am running pain free. As an added bonus I have been about 25 years without either a cold or flu or even worse, viral gastroenteritis.
Recommended reading:
Stryer Biochemistry Fourth Edition
Natural sources of vitamin C:
chili peppers, broccoli, bell peppers, kale, cauliflower, strawberries, lemons, mustard and turnip greens, brussels sprouts, papaya, chard, cabbage, spinach, kiwifruit, snow peas, cantaloupe, oranges, grapefruit, limes, tomatoes, zucchini, raspberries, asparagus, celery, pineapple, lettuce, watermelon, fennel, peppermint, parsley andcollard greens.
I don't disagree with those who feel that we should try to get our vitamin C from natural sources. I also agree that natural sources are the best, however, during periods of intense stress or if you are running a lot, it may not be possible to ingest enough vitamin C from natural sources to ward off a cold, keep your Achille's tendons happy or just keep your head on "straight."
Thanks for your attention.
To visit DrMericle.com:
http://www.DrMericle.comCopyright J. Mericle M.D. 2004 All Rights Reserved
Milk and Osteoporosis
How Milk actually causes rather than cures osteoporosis.
“The myth that osteoporosis is caused by calcium deficiency was created to sell dairy products and calcium supplements. There's no truth to it. American women are among the biggest consumers of calcium in the world, and they still have one of the highest levels of osteoporosis in the world. And eating even more dairy products and calcium supplements is not going to change that fact.” - Dr. John McDougall
The ingestion of milk causes the blood to become acidic -pH less than the normal 7.43. The body corrects this via the calcium phosphate balance which requires mobilization of additional calcium into the bloodstream to correct the acidosis. This calcium is obtained by removing it from the bones. Thus, it is no surprise that milk causes a total body calcium loss. This is not new information and is well discussed with reference to the original studies in John Robbins's book "Diet for a New America."
Amazing as it sounds, the ash (residue) from any animal protein that finds its way to the bloodstream is so acid that the homeostatic mechanisms of the body that maintain the pH of the blood at 7.43 are immediately invoked. The prime mechanism to accomplish this (as noted above) is the calcium / phosphate balance in the bloodstream. Since calcium acts as a base (can correct an acid condition of the blood) the body pulls calcium from the bones to offset or correct the acidosis caused by the acid residue from the animal protein (this includes dairy / milk).
Over time the continuing ingestion of animal protein leads to significant loss of bone mineralization and eventually clinical osteoporosis. Ingesting more calcium is a very simplistic approach that more often than not does not help. The problem is that supplemental calcium seldom finds its way to the bloodstream and the body will continue to remove calcium from the bone since this is the pathway that mother nature has established. As a diagnostic radiologist I had many an occasion to see calcium tablets of all varieties totally undissolved in the colon, on abdominal radiographs. Treating osteoporosis with additional calcium is like replacing the wood in a termite infested house without eradicating the termites. The only effective (and extremely simple) answer is to just not consume animal protein. One of the other complications of the increased mobilization of calcium is kidney stones. The incidence of kidney stones is considerably increased in those who consume animal protein.
The Bantu women, who are exclusively vegan and live off of a completely plant based diet in central Africa, get less than 350 mg of calcium in their daily diet. Yet, there is no osteoporosis in these women since they do not ingest any animal protein. This is also true for many women in the more remote portions of mainland China.
All the new imaging devices for measuring bone density are really a large technological waste of time and money. If you consume animal protein you are at risk for osteoporosis -period. Just take some of the money you would spend to have your bone density measured and go out and buy some good organic veggies. You and your bones will love you for it.
Osteoporosis is not gender specific. Although more women than men are affected, men also have osteoporosis. I once knew an Ultrasound technician in his thirties who had osteoporosis.
Other lifestyle changes one can make to reduce risk for osteoporosis are:
Decrease or eliminate sugar from your diet. Try to cutback on processed foods since they usually contain generous amounts of simple sugars.
Sodas, diet or otherwise, should be avoided as much as possible.
Highly acid vinegars are also implicated.
Avoid caffeine, smoking and alcohol as much as possible.
Start a weight bearing exercise program since bones develop in the direction of stress. Running and walking are two good forms of weight bearing exercise. Cross-country skiing and cycling are also good.
Get plenty of sunshine or supplement vitamin D.
Recipes:
The following recipes are good sources of calcium from totally natural sources as well as recipes that avoid the foods that cause osteoporosis. For those of you outside of the US the need for organic foods is not as critical since the destructive commercial farming practices here have not reached the rest of the world -yet. This is especially true in Europe where a tomato, I am told, still tastes like a tomato.
Black bean burritos, tostadas and tacos.
Prepare some organic black beans refried style as in the MericleDiet or however you like to prepare your beans. Obtain some organic tortillas, taco or tostada shells. Drop some refried beans into or onto one of the above and add some chopped lettuce, cabbage or onions. Black beans and onions really make a good burrito. Wrap the tortilla around your filling and garnish with salsa and maybe some more cabbage or lettuce. If you like, you can fry the burrito to make what we used to call a "Cindy Special" from an old Mexican restaurant here in Tucson. The frying is however not without its caloric burden, although it makes for a real taste treat.
Other good sources of calcium are organic kale, collards, broccoli, bok choy and tofu. A fresh spinach salad makes a nice addition to this meal and a lot of organic greens really are excellent sources of calcium that the body can utilize. I have been told that, although spinach is high in calcium, it is also high in oxalic acid which is alleged to bind the calcium thus limiting its absorption. However spinach is still a good bet since among all its great qualities, it has also been shown to retard the development of macular degeneration -a very serious problem for the elderly in this country.
For more information on cooking and preparing food without animal products follow the link below:
http://www.drmericle.com/fscook3c.phpSummary:
Osteoporosis is not a disease of calcium absorption but is a proactive disease caused by ingesting foods that upset the acid/base balance of the body thus requiring calcium to be slowly but constantly leached from your bones in order to keep the blood (pH) normal (7.43). No amount of ingested calcium will correct the problem as long as one continues to destroy their bones by eating the wrong foods. The answer is to simply stop the destruction of your bones by significantly reducing or completely stopping the ingestion of animal protein.
We hope you find this informative. Please stay tuned for the next newsletter that will cover sugar, vitamin C, insulin, your white blood cells, your immune system and the very interesting subject of competitive inhibition or -how much vitamin C should I take?
One last quote:
"In the next 10 to 15 years, one of the things you're bound to hear is that animal protein ... is one of the most toxic nutrients of all that can be considered . Risk for disease goes up dramatically when even a little animal protein is added to the diet." T. Colin Campbell Ph.D. (Author of The China Study).
Remember the Bantu women.
Thanks for your attention.
To visit DrMericle.com follow the link below:
http://www.drmericle.comCopyright J. Mericle M.D. 2004 All Rights Reserved
14 Simple Things You Can Do to Reduce Your Risk of Breast Cancer
1. Increase your consumption of fresh, organic fruits and vegetables.
2.Avoid using any pesticides or chemical sprays in your home. Try to avoid new carpet.
3.Avoid drinking tap water.
4.Decrease alcohol consumption.
5.Start an exercise program.
6.Increase consumption of organic whole grains and fiber.
7.Decrease meat, poultry and fish consumption.
8.Stop smoking.
9.Increase consumption of phytoestrogens from organic sources.
10.Decrease or stop consumption of processed foods.
11.Avoid trans-fatty acids found in margarine and some vegetable shortenings.
12.Take two capsules of organic flaxseed oil daily or just add a teaspoon of flaxseed oil to your daily organic salad.
13.If you are pregnant definitely breast feed.
14.Gets lots of sunshine as breast cancer is less prevalent in areas where there is ample sunlight unobscured by fog or smog.
Discussion:
As a retired diagnostic radiologist who read way too many mammograms I am excited because I finally have a path to try to connect to so many women who are having and have had mammograms.I was always chagrined since we would really torture and radiate many breasts but it was as if these breasts were not connected to a human type person. It bothered me that so many mammography programs make no effort at all to educate their clientele about what "they can do" to reduce their risks of breast cancer. I would suggest to the directors of these programs that we try to educate the patients and their response was 100% predictable. They would always first deny the relationship between diet and breast cancer and then add that their patients would not listen anyway.
Increasing your consumption of fresh organic fruits and vegetables has been shown to reduce the risk for breast cancer.
"There is strong evidence from epidemiologic studies that eating more fruits and vegetables decreases a woman's risk of developing breast cancer. This conclusion is strengthened by the similar results obtained from animal studies and experiments using isolated breast cells." Quoted from the Cornell University Program on Breast Cancer and Environmental Risk Factors. They go on to recommend uncooked fruits and vegetables. The reason for this is the heating damages some of the beneficial nutrients in the fruits and vegetables. Carrots, squash, sweet potatoes, broccoli and spinach top the list for being most protective. The Cornell study however does not stress the fact that these need to be "organic." Non-organic commercial fruits and vegetables besides being largely nutritionally bereft are also heavily sprayed with a wide variety of toxins.
The relationship between pesticides and other toxic chemicals such as benzene and toluene and cancer has long been established. There are better ways to rid your house of undesired guests than using chemical sprays. It sounds difficult but even if you can't get rid of all your pests you will live a longer and healthier life if you refrain from spraying. New carpet is another source of extremely toxic chemicals that "off gas" for at least a year or so after it is installed. Try to avoid new carpet especially in children's rooms.
Avoid tap water unless you live either in Lake Tahoe or Ithaca, New York. The tap water here in Tucson is CAP water that travels in an open trough from the Colorado River. It is loaded with fungicides / herbicides not to mention all the chlorine added once it gets here. While bottled or filtered water may not be perfect,you will considerably reduce your risk for any cancer by avoiding most tap water.
There is a little debate about the link between alcohol consumption and breast cancer. However, the consumption of any simple sugars such as occur in most alcoholic beverages is associated with decreased T-cell mobility and thus some immune compromise. I still have an occasional beer but that is the only sugar I ingest. The general consensus however, is that it is best to reduce alcoholic beverage consumption as much as possible.
Exercise has been proven in multiple studies to enhance the immune system. In order to be beneficial I would recommend thirty minutes at least three times a week. This should be exercise that elevates the heart rate and keeps it there for the thirty minutes. Running is good if you are not biomechanically impaired. Cycling and swimming are also good alternative and or exercise machines.
Increased consumption of organic grains and fiber has been shown to reduce the risk of breast cancer.
Decrease your meat, fish, poultry and dairy consumption. Animal protein has been linked to all the big three killers in this country as well as osteoporosis. For more on this see the "China Study" by T. Colin Campbell and "Diet for a New America" by John Robbins.
Stop smoking is really a "no brainer" here. Smoking is associatedwith a variety of cancers and there is now strong evidence that cancer of the breast is one of them.
Consume more phytoestrogens from soy products like tofu. "Women with diets rich in phytoestrogens also excrete more estrogens into their urine, and have lower blood estrogen levels. Some studies have shown that women with a diet rich in phytoestrogens have longer, and hence fewer, menstrual cycles. All of these factors may contribute to reduced breast cancer risk. " This quote from the Cornell University Program on Breast Cancer and Environmental Risk Factors.
In conclusion there are many ways to reduce your chances of breast cancer. I have presented the above from a more subtle point of view. When my wife (now ex-wife) developed a lesion in her left breast back in 1995 we put her on an organic vegan diet. Soon we cut out all sugar and increased her running mileage to 80 miles / week. She still has her left breast although there is still some skin retraction. My good friend and world class flamenco dancer Carmen Heredia died in her early forties from breast cancer and its treatment. Best not to get breast cancer at all.
For more information on the relationship between diet, health and exercise please go to:
http://www.drmericle.comFor more information on cooking and food preparation without animal products please go to:
http://www.drmericle.com/fscook3c.phpCopyright J. Mericle M.D. 2004 All Rights Reserved
Welcome to Dr. Mericle's Diet Health Weight Loss and Exercise Blog
Welcome,
I would like to thank you for visiting Dr. Mericle's Diet Health Weight Loss and Exercise Blog. We will be posting articles that I hope help you to avoid making a lot of the same mistakes that we have over the years and achieve the best health and fitness level possible for yourself.
Thanks for your attention,
John Mericle M.D. D.A.B.R.
