Aging Now a Disease? Humanity Should Treat It Like One, Scientist Says

Scientists are starting to reconsider our major preconception about aging. Is it really a natural phenomenon or a disease that could be treated?

It may be helpful to remember that under this question are a lot of factors. For instance, is aging really just a natural process that we should recognize? Why then are we so focused on creating technologies that will reverse its effects?

Philosophers have regarded aging as one of the reasons why we are afraid of death, and it has led to quite a lot of lessons about “cherishing life” and “making every moment count.”

However, the biomedical community seems to be on the verge of rethinking their stance on the matter.

Cambridge University’s Aubrey de Grey has pondered the question for a while. A trained computer scientist and a self-taught biologist and gerontologist, de Grey has been trying to reframe our mentality about aging.

In an article by Scientist, De Grey said it may be time to consider aging as a pathologic process, as in one like cancer and diabetes that can be “treated.”

It is important to remember that “aging” is the term we use to describe the changes our bodies undergo over time. The early changes are good as we develop stronger muscles and better reflexes. However, our problems begin when we start getting thinner hair and weaker resistances. Not to mention, the human body has different parts that develop at different paces.

Any wrong move in the pacing of the growth of our body results to diseases. For instance, while lipids are a natural part of our diet, too much of it will make our blood vessels harden and narrow, leading to heart attacks.

De Grey said we can (and we should) view aging as something that could be prevented. A team of scientists also share this belief.

In their paper published in Frontiers in Genetics, scientists Sven Bulterijs, Raphaella Hull, Victor Bjork, and Avi Roy believe that a lot of diseases that affect us over time are caused by aging.

Diseases such as the Hutchinson-Gilford Progeria syndrome, Werner syndrome, and Dyskeratosis Congenita are considered diseases that affect teenagers and young adults. However, they are considered normal and unworthy of attention when they are seen in older people.

Interestingly, common bodily afflictions that come with aging such as hypertension, atherosclerosis, dementia, and sarcopenia are all considered “diseases.” What makes aging different?

And while some consider the debate as something purely semantic, as in the way in which we define certain terms, there are “benefits” for such a label.

For instance, labeling aging as a disease will better help physicians make more medical efforts to remove and treat conditions associated with aging that we normally ignore. Calling something a disease will merit some form of commitment to medical intervention.

Source: natureworldnews

The Significance of Selenium

Selenium is a trace element a Swedish chemist, Baron Jöns Jacob Berzelius, discovered almost 200 years ago. Today, modern scientists recognize it as “an essential mineral of pivotal importance for human health,” with anti-inflammatory, antiviral and anti-cancer potential.1

This mineral is also a powerful antioxidant, which plays itself out in many ways in regard to your health. You need only a little, though, to help keep your immune system and other functions humming along in proper order.

As much as your body requires selenium, taking the proper amount is crucial, because too much (such as 400 micrograms [mcg] daily) is associated with an increased risk of diabetes.2

However, unless you’re taking a supplement, it’s not likely you’ll overdose on selenium through the foods you eat. In fact, most people have trouble getting what they need, and as many as 1 billion people worldwide have a selenium deficiency.

Your chance of having a selenium deficiency is higher if you smoke cigarettes, take birth control pills, drink alcohol or have a condition that keeps you from absorbing the nutrients you need through the foods you eat.

Free Radicals: The ‘Bad Guys’ You Don’t Want Lurking in Your Body

As previously mentioned, one of the most important aspects of selenium is that it functions as a free-radical-zapping antioxidant. What does that mean, exactly?

When you take the word apart, “anti” is something you’re against and the word or phrase that follows it is the “bad guy.” In this case, what you’re against is oxidation because it can cause oxidative stress, which in turn can lead to tissue and organ damage. According to News-Medical:

“Oxidative stress is essentially an imbalance between the production of free radicals and the ability of the body to counteract or detoxify their harmful effects through neutralization by antioxidants”3

While “free radicals” may be another murky term, in short, free radicals and other assorted reactive oxygen species (ROS) are caused by either normal, internal metabolic processes or via outside influences such as nicotine and X-rays, or exposure to harmful chemicals like those used to kill mosquitoes, germs in your bathroom or weeds around your patio. One study explains:

“Free radicals, reactive oxygen species (ROS) and reactive nitrogen species are generated by our body by various endogenous systems, exposure to different physiochemical conditions or pathological states. A balance between free radicals and antioxidants is necessary for proper physiological function.

If free radicals overwhelm the body’s ability to regulate them, a condition known as oxidative stress ensues. Free radicals thus adversely alter lipids, proteins and DNA and trigger a number of human diseases. Hence application of external source of antioxidants can assist in coping (with) oxidative stress.”4

It may be helpful to remember that free radicals can cause cell damage, and antioxidants fight free radicals.

Thyroid Function and the Role of Selenium

Your thyroid contains more selenium per gram of tissue than any other organ. One study explains:

“In 1957, studies investigating the requirements of nutrients in rodent diets revealed selenium (along with vitamin E) to be essential for prevention of liver necrosis. This led to the realization that selenium deficiency was responsible for a number of disorders observed previously …

(Selenium is) a contributing factor to Keshan disease in humans. Although toxicity at higher levels is still a serious problem, the importance of selenium as an essential micronutrient is now recognized.”5

Another study states that the value of selenium supplementation for people with autoimmune thyroid problems is becoming more understood and deficiency even appears to have an impact on the development of thyroid problems, possibly due to selenium’s ability to regulate the production of ROS and their metabolites.

In patients with Hashimoto’s disease, selenium supplementation “decreases anti-thyroid antibody levels and improves the ultrasound structure of the thyroid gland.”6 Further, studies for pregnant women regarding selenium say that supplementation significantly lowers the risk of postpartum thyroiditis.7

Selenium Strengths: Proper Amounts Cut Your Risk of Serious Disease

According to one meta-analysis:

“Selenium may play a beneficial role in multi-factorial illnesses with genetic and environmental linkages … Tissues particularly sensitive to changes in selenium supply include red blood cells, kidney and muscle.

The meta-analysis identified that for animal species selenium-enriched foods were more effective than selenomethionine at increasing (glutathione peroxidase) activity.”8

Immune Function

One of the most important functions of selenium is its ability to help your body fight disease. It raises your white blood cell count so you’re more able to resist infections.

An example is a study showing that selenium may help prevent a skin infection prevalent in people with lymphedema (swelling of the tissues in your arms and/or legs, usually as a result of chemotherapy or injury), and mycoplasma pneumonia, aka “walking” pneumonia.9

Cancer

In 2012, researchers reported that in areas of the world where selenium levels are naturally low, supplementing with selenium may be cancer protective.10 Study author and professor John Hesketh of Newcastle University, U.K., explained:

“The difficulty with selenium is that it’s a very narrow window between levels that are sub-optimal and those that would be considered toxic.

What our study shows is a possible link between higher levels of selenium and a decreased risk of colorectal cancer and suggests that increasing selenium intake may reduce the risk of this disease.”11

Heart Benefits

While it should be noted that some researchers say taking selenium supplements doesn’t appear to influence heart disease one way or the other or protect against heart attack, the University of Maryland Medical Center reported:

“Scientists know that low levels of selenium can contribute to heart failure, and being deficient in selenium seems to make atherosclerosis worse. Atherosclerosis, or hardening of the arteries, happens when plaque builds up in arteries, which can lead to heart attack and stroke.”12

Another study found that patients who took selenium supplements on a regular basis are “far less likely” to have another heart attack.13

Asthma

Asthma sufferers tend to have higher incidences of low selenium levels in their blood. Scientists found that diets containing high amounts of antioxidants are associated with lowered asthma prevalence in epidemiologic studies, as a report on accumulated data revealed:

“Accumulated data indicate that asthma is associated with reduced circulatory selenium (Se) … In the Se-supplemented group there were significant increases in serum Se

… Further, there was a significant clinical improvement in the Se-supplemented group, as compared with the placebo group.”14

Among 24 subjects with asthma, those who took supplements for 14 weeks had fewer symptoms than those taking a placebo, one study found. However, scientists agree that more studies are needed.15

Male infertility

Proteins found in sperm and involved in their formation are impacted by selenium and other antioxidants.

An interesting dichotomy, however, is that while studies show male infertility may be improved by the selenium in a man’s system, levels that are too high can inhibit the sperm’s ability to swim, according to the University of Maryland Medical Center.16 Another study concluded:

“Selenium-enriched probiotics or inorganic selenium supplementation gave better results than probiotics supplementation and may be used to improve animal and human male fertility compromised by hyperlipidemia or obesity.”17

HIV/AIDS

Most of the African continent is selenium deficient. Simultaneously, AIDS is the most common cause of death. News-Medical, examining diseases impacted by selenium, reported:

“Taken as a whole, the geographical evidence, therefore, strongly suggests that selenium is protective against HIV infection.

Such a relationship is not limited to this virus. A frequently fatal illness of the heart, known as Keshan disease, is widespread in the population of the low selenium belt that crosses China from northeast to southwest. Keshan disease occurs only in individuals who are both selenium deficient and infected by the coxsackievirus”18

While the highest death rates from AIDS affect several of the southwestern-most portions of the continent, such as Botswana, Uganda and Kenya, “the prevalence rate for HIV infection still hovers at an unusually low 0.5 percent among women attending antenatal clinics” in Dakar, the capital city of Senegal.

The difference, scientists say, is that Senegal is located on the far western coast of Africa, where the soil is enriched with trace elements of selenium, contrasting the eastern portion, where the soil is devoid of the selenium that might help make a difference in this regard.

A similar situation is taking place in Finland where, to combat heart disease, legislation was passed in 1984 ordering sodium selenite to be added to all fertilizers throughout the country. Perhaps as a result, the country’s HIV rates are half that of other Scandinavian countries.

Selenium From Food: Seafood, Mushrooms and Meat

The best selenium sources from food include salmon (although only wild-caught Alaskan salmon is recommended due to widespread pollution in other fish), free-range organic turkey, lamb and grass-fed organic beef. You can also find high amounts of selenium in Brazil nuts, sunflower seeds, onions and garlic and certain mushrooms.19 SFGate says:

“Mushrooms are one of the top vegetable sources for selenium. One cup of cooked shiitakes or white button mushrooms provides 19 micrograms of selenium, or 35 percent of the RDA. A more typical serving of ¼ cup provides less than 10 percent of the daily value.

A cup of cooked Lima or pinto beans averages 9 to 11 micrograms of the mineral, or about 15 to 20 percent of the RDA. Frozen cooked spinach, which is packed more tightly per cup than fresh cooked, provides 10 micrograms of selenium, or 18 percent of the RDA.”

It’s not just how much selenium is in your food, though, that determines how much you’re getting. It’s also about how much selenium is in the soil your food is grown in. Related factors include how much selenium was in the grass eaten by the cattle producing your grass-fed beef.

(Grass-fed beef, by the way, contains a healthy ratio between omega-6 and omega-3 fats. Naturally, you also want it to be free of hormones and antibiotics.)

mercola.com

 

Is Coffee Good or Bad for you?

“Dr. Hyman, I’m so confused about coffee,” writes this week’s house call. “One day I read that it’s so bad for me and the next it’s good for me. Why all the conflicting information?”

Let’s face it: Americans love their coffee, which is the number one source of antioxidants in our diet – which actually makes me kind of sad!

In a recent animal study, researchers saw improvements in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and cholesterol when mice consumed coffee and fat together. (More on that combo in a minute.) They also found coffee can help reduce gut permeability or leaky gut.

Among its other benefits, studies show coffee decreases your risk for type 2 diabetes, lowers cancer risk and improves mood and memory. Coffee can also boost metabolism and sports performance.

On the other hand, coffee can become highly addictive, altering stress hormones while making you feel simultaneously wired and tired.

So I understand the confusion. It feels like one day we see studies that support coffee and the next day we see 10 reasons why coffee is bad. So let’s uncover the truth about this aromatic beverage that most of us love.

When to Avoid Coffee

Before jumping to conclusions, remember those blurred lines aren’t entirely about coffee itself. It also depends on the person drinking the coffee. The way you respond to coffee is often determined by genetics that affect caffeine metabolism. For one person, a cup could have them bouncing off the walls, while another person can have a triple espresso at dinner and fall fast asleep easily.

In other words, everyone is different and we all experience coffee’s effects differently. One patient complained about fatigue, restlessness and heart palpitations. Obviously, in that situation, I recommended avoiding coffee.

Likewise, if you suffer from adrenal fatigue, coffee could easily become dangerous. Some individuals might also be sensitive to coffee beans, meaning their bodies can’t tolerate them and they create unpleasant symptoms.

Constituents in coffee can also interfere with normal drug metabolism and liver detoxification, making it difficult for your liver to regulate the normal detoxification process.

Sometimes, too, I find patients substitute coffee for real food. Never ignore your hunger and eat regularly to prevent low blood sugar levels. Keep protein on hand and snack on a handful of nuts or seeds like almonds, pecans, walnuts or pumpkin seeds.

I had one patient who drank 12 cups of coffee a day yet constantly fell asleep at his desk. This person could barely function and couldn’t understand why he felt so exhausted.  The truth is he wasn’t sleeping well at night due to all the caffeine but he was too exhausted to realize it.  He wasn’t getting the proper rest his body desperately needed at the right time.

So we tapered him off coffee, and he began to sleep soundly at night, rather than nodding off  at his desk during the day.

If you fall into those categories, coffee probably isn’t for you.

Regardless, I recommend treating coffee like any other potential toxic trigger and eliminate it for at least three weeks, especially if you’re addicted and can’t seem to function without coffee or if you drink multiple cups a day.

If you need coffee every day to feel motivated or even function, you have a coffee addiction. If you have withdrawal symptoms and headaches from stopping coffee or feel like you can’t live without it, you are biologically addicted to it.  There’s also a big chance your stress hormones are out of whack and need resetting.

How to Quit Coffee   

The best way to wean off coffee is switching from drinking multiple cups to just one cup and eventually half a cup. You might also switch to green tea or herbal teas and warm lemon water.

As with any detox plan, drink adequate amounts of water and get plenty of rest during this time. I also suggest regular exercise to stabilize energy levels. Should you get irritable or have difficulty sleeping, supplement with 200 to 500 mg of magnesium citrate before bed.

My favorite detoxification rituals include a sauna, meditation and yoga. I provide powerful techniques to relax and combat stress on my website.

If you can handle it, remove coffee from your diet for three weeks and add it back in slowly. Be attentive to how you feel once you reintroduce coffee. Pay attention to your energy levels, symptoms (like anxiety or jittery feelings) or changes in digestion.

In other words, monitor how you personally respond to coffee. You are your own best doctor here.

It’s perfectly fine if you realize coffee just does not work for you. Other health-friendly beverages include green tea or non-coffee-based lattes using reishi powder and other powerful herbs.

If you find you can occasionally tolerate coffee, avoid adding milk and sugar. These two culprits do more damage than the actual coffee.

Alternately, add fat to your coffee. Once people taste the creamy, frothy goodness of fat blended with coffee, they don’t miss milk at all. You’ve probably heard of Bulletproof® Coffee, which blends MCT oil and a bit of  grass-fed butter or ghee with high-quality, organic coffee.  If you are a vegan, try adding 1 tablespoon of cashew butter for the creamy texture.

This delicious beverage keeps me satiated for hours, cuts cravings and keeps my brain extremely sharp. You can also drink this before exercise for steady energy levels without coffee’s crash.

Here is a version of my friend Dave Asprey’s Bulletproof Coffee:

In a blender, add:

  • 2 cups of hot coffee (regular or decaf), ideally fresh brewed with organic beans
  • 2 tablespoons of grass-fed butter or ghee
  • 2 tablespoons of organic coconut oil or 2 Tablespoons of MCT oil
  • ½ teaspoon of organic cinnamon (optional) or 1 teaspoon of organic cocoa powder for a mocha

Blend until creamy. For best results, I suggest using a metal mesh filter in your drip coffee maker or a French press.

Note: Always be very careful when pureeing hot liquids in a blender. The heat from the liquid can cause the pressure in the blender to build up under the lid, and when the blender is turned on, the top can blow off and your hot soup will go everywhere. Keep the lid vented by removing the small window insert from the middle of the blender lid; hold a towel over the open window to prevent splattering. Always start on the lowest speed possible.

The bottom line is that much no one-size-fits-all approach exists for diet and lifestyle, and that includes your coffee intake.

One person may be able to enjoy raw, cruciferous vegetables while another needs to avoid them because of digestive issues. This same thing applies to coffee. For some people it works; others, not so much.

If you’re a coffee drinker, have you ever felt like you’ve over-relied on this popular beverage? If you temporarily gave it up, how did it affect you? Comment below or on my Facebook page. And be sure to submit your questions to drhyman.com.

Wishing you health and happiness,

Source: drhyman.com

Doctors Have Known For 10 Years They’re Killing You

This is one of the most-damning studies that has ever been brought to my attention.

The “standard”, if you have ever had a cardiac “event” or coronary artery disease, is to immediately place you on a statin (for the rest of your life) and, in most cases (exception: if you have ulcer issues) low-dose aspirin as a low-level anticoagulant.

Here’s the problem: It doesn’t work because it’s not targeting where the actual issue resides.

This has now been known since 2004, when this study published; the study itself was initiated in 1999.  304 patients with a history of coronary artery disease were tested and baselined.  Only those with normal glucose levels were accepted into the study; clinical diabetes was an exclusionary factor.  202 of the 304 were excluded at baseline for this reason, leaving the study authors with 102 patients.

The results ought to wake you up; they’re here in this table.

CAD Study

The CVE+ entries are for those who had a second cardiac event during the three years of the study, the CVE- entries are for those who did not.  ALL of the CVE+ entries had elevated (by double on average) insulin levels despite both groups having normal blood glucose.

Further, those who had a second event had no material difference in cholesterol levels compared to those who did not.  In other words “management” of cholesterol levels was not protective.  Finally, there was a material difference in statin use — in the negative sense, in that a greater percentage of those who had an event were taking a statin (and a nitrate!) than those who didn’t, and even worse, aspirin wasn’t protective either.

One cautionary note: All of these results are associative, as they must be in such a study.  Even though the divergence in insulin levels was ridiculous between the two groups that does not prove causation.

But remember — while associations can provide strong evidence of a connection they are just as valuable, if not more-so, in disproving said connections.  In this case it appears that both statins and aspirin are worthless when it comes to preventing a second CAD event.

Further, since all of the participants had normal glucose levels there is no intervention that targets “diabetes management” which helps in this case.  Indeed the study showed that “management” of diabetes symptoms (specifically, blood glucose levels) that allows high insulin to persist may actually potentiate — that is, cause — the second heart attack and CAD event.

There is no medicine for the condition of high insulin — that is, “insulin resistance.”  We can and do treat the symptom that it (eventually) produces, that is, high blood glucose, but the cause of the high glucose remains unaddressed.

There is, however, a means to improve your insulin sensitivity — that is, to move yourself either from that second column to the first one or at least get closer to itGet all of the vegetable oils and carbohydrates (that is, grains and starches including breads, cereals and similar), with the exception of green vegetables and modest amounts of fruit, out of your diet.

Again — this study has been out since 2004.  Why hasn’t your doctor — and especially, if you have one, your cardiologist — told you?

Further, if you’ve got evidence of CAD in your medical history why hasn’t your insulin sensitivity (NOT just cholesterol and glucose tolerance) been tested and monitored?  Is it because there is no pill for it and that the actual means of improvement available to us require admitting that the so-called “standard recommendations” for what to eat, especially for those with heart disease, are exactly backward?

Source: http://market-ticker.org/

The World Health Organization Red Meat Brouhaha

The World Health Organization (WHO) just announced that red meat is “probably carcinogenic to humans.”

Yep–Right up there with glyphosate, cigarettes, alcohol and asbestos.

——–> insert facepalm <——–

This announcement is absurdly misguided and largely based upon the notoriously two least reliable forms of science we have:

1) Observational studies driven by…

2) Food questionnaires

(By the way, what did YOU have for lunch on Thursday of last week/month year?)

This is all fully based on the idea of “guilt by weak association” and any rational person knows that association is NOT causation.

UGH–Back to the nutritional Dark Ages we go…

The WHO seems to be mostly citing evidence from research based on observational studies and food questionnaires published in the Archives of Internal Medicine in 2012, which included an analysis of “two prospective cohort studies.”[1] Similar in its failures to the ill-conceived and embarrassingly poor 2011 World Cancer Research Fund “Meta-analysis”[2]—also entirely based upon observational studies and questionnaires— ZERO distinction was made between feedlot meat and 100% grass-fed meat (a potentially huge distinction), and no real effort was made to distinguish the effect of the red meat from whatever else people happened to be eating. What did they include as “red meat?”   McDonald’s hamburgers, pizza, hot dogs, tacos, bologna, nitrate-laced bacon and feedlot meat (GMO-fed and God knows what else). Although they did graciously concede that red meat is “only slightly less hazardous than preserved meats.” And red meat consumption was not separated in any way from whatever else anyone was eating or doing to their health (alcohol intake, sugar consumption, grains, etc. or other lifestyle factors). And since 97% of all meat production is commercial feedlot-based, grass-fed meat likely didn’t even factor into these results at all.

Suspiciously, too, the Archives of Internal Medicine study used what is called relative risk to show their results. “Relative risk” is frequently used to make things look far worse than they are—rather than what is called absolute risk, which really tells it like it is (but might make your results look less dramatic and, well, boring and meaningless).

It is a significant fact that cancer has been consistently reported to be extremely rare to even non-existent in red meat-eating, hunter-gatherer societies.[3],[4] What in particular has characterized the difference between even Neolithic hunter-gatherer diets and the modern-day Western diet causing us so much trouble now? Data from 229 hunter-gatherer societies included in the Revised Ethnographic Atlas indicate that hunter-gatherer diets differ from typical Western ones in basically two aspects: first, a strong reliance on animal foods (45-65% of energy or E%) and second, the consumption of low-GI [glycemic index] plant foods such as fibrous vegetables, some fruits, nuts and seeds.[5] But we also need to take the quality of the foods they had available to them into account and the very, very different nutrient/fatty acid profile between feedlot meat and 100% naturally grass-fed meat/wild game. Grain fed meats are predominated by potentially inflammatory omega-6 content (while being nearly devoid of healthy omega-3’s), versus 100% grass-fed and finished meat (and wild game) which supplies a high percentage of highly anti-inflammatory omega-3 fatty acids (EPA/DHA). Omega-3’s have additionally shown some significant anti-cancer benefits.[6] [7] [8]

Quality counts for a LOT and we all need to start taking that seriously. Deadly seriously.

In spite of the WHO declaration, other research has shown no meaningful link between diets higher in dietary animal fat and increased cancer risk.[9],[10] With respect to colon cancer, alone, there are many, many more (and better designed) studies finding little to no significant association with red meat and cancer than those that do, some even showing an actual lowered risk![11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25]

With respect to Paleo—at least the form of Paleo I personally recommend and the form adopted by The Paleo Way, bases its meat consumption overall on two very distinct recommendations:

  • Red meat should only come from 100% pasture fed and finished animals. NO feedlot and/or commercial processed meat!
  • I recommend meat/protein in general to be consumed in strict moderation—no more than about 1 gram per kg of ideal body weight (i.e., approximating the weight of a person’s lean tissue mass)

Excessive protein from any source is potentially bad by virtue of 1) its up-regulation of proliferative mTOR pathways 2) its increase of IGF-1, which increases non-specific cellular proliferation and 3) the excess presence of glutamine and 4) protein in excess of what we need in order to meet our basic requirements is readily (up to 40% or so) converted to sugar and used the same way. –And SUGAR (not red meat) is cancer’s #1 most essential metabolic fuel.

With respect to the benefits of exclusively grass-fed meat (over feedlot meat), a particular form of fat that has been more recently lauded for its anti-cancer benefits is one exclusively found in the fat of animals fed on nothing but natural pasture.[26] [27] [28] [29] [30]    In fact, CLA may be one of the most broadly beneficial and potent cancer-fighting substances in our diet. It is somewhat uniquely able to (in very small amounts) block all three stages of cancer: 1) initiation 2) growth/promotion and 3) metastasis. Most “anticancer nutrients” are typically helpful in only one of these areas. To date, beneficial effects of natural CLA from animal fat have been found in cancers of the breast, prostate, colon and skin. In animal studies, as little as one half of one percent CLA in the diet of experimental animals reduced tumor burden by more than 50 percent.[31]   As if this wasn’t exciting enough, there is more direct evidence that CLA may reduce cancer risk in humans. In a Finnish study, women who had the highest levels of CLA in their diet had a 60 percent lower risk of breast cancer than those having the lowest levels. Switching from grain-fed to exclusively grass-fed meat literally places women in this lowest risk category!

Additionally, French researchers measured CLA levels in the breast tissues of 360 women and found that the women with the most CLA had the lowest risk of cancer. In fact, the women with the most CLA had a staggering 74% lower risk of breast cancer than the women with the least CLA. [32]   In yet another study, human breast cancer cells were incubated in milk fat high in CLA or in an isolated form of CLA without any milk fat. The high CLA milk fat decreased cancer growth by 90 percent but the isolated CLA decreased it by only 60 percent. When the cells were incubated in the omega-6 fat, linoleic acid, found most abundantly in grain and grain-fed animals, cancer cell growth increased by 25 percent![33] Other women with the most CLA in their diets were also shown to have a 60% reduction overall in the incidence of breast cancer.[34]

Other studies have additionally shown breast cancer and even colon cancer preventative benefits.[35] [36] [37] [38] In keeping with this, CLA additionally exerts potent anti-inflammatory effects.[39] The inherent stability of CLA also seems to maintain itself even when meat is cooked.[40],[41] One study pointed out the following, Of the vast number of naturally occurring substances that have been demonstrated to have anticarcinogenic activity in experimental models, all but a handful of them are of plant origin. Conjugated linoleic acid is unique because it is present in food from animal sources, and its anticancer efficacy is expressed at concentrations close to human consumption levels.”[42]   CLA is highly abundant, too, in wild game. The implication here is that naturally occurring CLA in animal fat has always played an important role in our diets and may possibly even be a contributing factor to the near-zero incidence of cancer found in hunter-gatherer populations.[43] For all you Aussies out there, one study reported unusually high levels of CLA in (of all things) kangaroo meat![44]

ONLY CLA from the fat of wild game and fully pastured animals has the real anticancer health benefits you want.[45] Even though synthetic CLA is sold in capsules in health food stores, it lacks the beneficial form found exclusively in grass-fed meats and may even have potentially adverse effects. But I digress…

According to a research collaboration between Clemson University and the USDA in 2009, in addition to cancer-fighting CLA, fully pastured meat contains the following additional, potentially anti-cancer benefits[46]:

  • Higher in beta-carotene
  • Higher in vitamin E (alpha-tocopherol)
  • Higher in the B-vitamins thiamin and riboflavin and B12
  • Higher in the minerals calcium, magnesium, and potassium
  • Higher in total omega-3’s[47] [48] [49]
  • A healthier ratio of (inflammatory) omega-6 to anti-inflammatory omega-3 fatty acids (1.65 vs. 4.84)
  • Higher in trans-vaccenic acid (TVA–which can be transformed into CLA)

Also, lamb/sheep fed exclusively on pasture vs. grain contains twice as much lutein (closely related to beta-carotene but more easily absorbed), which has shown possible preventative benefits with respect to both colon and breast cancer (while additionally reducing the risk of macular degeneration).[50]

So…in a nutshell, this WHO declaration will not change the recommendations I have been making all along. 100% grass-fed and finished meat (not just red meat, by the way) consumed in moderate amounts along with quality, organic fibrous plant-based foods has been and will continue to be among my foundational recommendations for optimal health.

~ Nora Gedgaudas, CNS, CNT, BCHN

 

“Red meat is NOT bad for you. Now blue-green meat, THAT’S bad for you!”

                           —Tommy Smothers

Source:  http://www.primalbody-primalmind.com/who-red-meat-brouhaha/

Lecture on vitamin C by brilliant Suzanne Humphries