Exercise in Nature to Boost Mental Health

June 7, 2010

Exercising in the green, natural environments has long been known to boost – not necessarily the physical health benefit – but one’s mood, self-esteem and odds of avoiding mental illness such as depression and other psychological conditions. But a study has pinpointed exactly how much time spent working out in green environments – not sitting around outside but actually exercising in those parks, gardens, nature trails and nature-heavy environments – is required to achieve maximum mental health benefit. And it’s a mere five minutes. The study conclusions were released on May 1, by the journal Environmental Science & Technology.

Click here and type in “depression,” “anxiety” or any other mood-related health challenge in the search bar to learn more about what you can do to enhance your outlook and stave off depression and anxiety.  Another helpful site is SickSyndrome.com.

A few favorite natural supplements prescribed at our medical practice used to enhance mood include Tryptophan, Anxiety Pack, and the Sickness Syndrome Depression Pack.

In health,

Dr. G

Leave a Comment » | ADHD, Autism, Depression, Diet and Disease, Naturopathic Medicine, Orthomolecular Psychiatry, Prevention | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Dr. Gina Nick

The Wall Street Reform Bill…Stop FTC Censorship of Science Based Health Information and Nutritional Supplements

May 12, 2010

Below is a reprint of a call to action by the Citizens for Health regarding deceptive language hidden within the Wall Street reform bill that grants the FTC the power to end access to information about the health benefits of the nutritional supplements you rely on.  The provisions relating to this increased legislative power (which incidentally was taken away from the FTC before because they abused it) has already passed the House (H.R.4173) and is now being considered by the Senate Commerce Committee.  Act now  to help stop these provisions from becoming law.

In health,

Dr. Gina

—

Hidden inside the Wall Street reform bill are provisions that would grant the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) the equivalent of extraordinary legislative powers. These provisions have already been passed by the House (H.R. 4173) and are being considered by the Senate Commerce Committee.

If signed into law, this bill would grant the FTC:
Unbridled authority to create rules about “unfair or deceptive acts or practices” across all but a few sectors of the American economy;

Power to seek immediate civil penalties for “unfair or deceptive acts or practices without first giving companies the opportunity to change their practices”;

Authority to go after companies for allegedly “aiding and abetting” others in an FTC Act violation, even without actual knowledge of the violation; and

Power to seek such penalties without coordinating with the Justice Department. 

Make no mistake – this is a serious threat to manufacturers, distributors and retailers of dietary supplements, and would censor your access to truthful, science-based information about the positive health effects of supplements, vitamins, herbs, and other natural health products.

The Senate Commerce Committee is ready to act –  click here to send a letter now urging them to oppose this bill.

Examining the impact of this dangerous legislation further shows that delegating such unbridled regulatory authority would harm the economy, limit market innovation, and jeopardize the jobs and products that flow from such innovation. The FTC could use expanded rule-making authority to regulate areas where its involvement would hinder new and emerging business practices, such as internet marketing. The threat of FTC rule-making would lead to the stifling of innovation in the marketplace, stunting growth that would otherwise create a projected 2.6 million new jobs in the internet marketing workforce over the next five years.

Citizens for Health will continue to fight efforts to limit your access to truthful, science-based information about the benefits of supplements – but we need your help.

Click here to contact your senators today and stress the importance of upholding the long-standing safeguards that prevent FTC over-reaching. 

Thanks for making your voice heard,

The Citizens for Health Team

2 Comments | Diet and Disease, Healthcare Politics, Latest Nutritional Research, Nutritional Supplements and Disease | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Dr. Gina Nick

Flaxseeds Lower Cholesterol in Men

April 30, 2010

A new study just presented at the American Society for Nutrition’s annual meeting at Experimental Biology 2010 shows that consuming 150 milligrams – about three tablespoons – of flaxseed lignans daily decreases cholesterol in men by almost 10 percent within three months. PureMeal, a part of the 21 day LTP Medical Purification Program, includes flaxseed meal and is a convenient, tasty way to support purification and lower your cholesterol on a daily basis!

Leave a Comment » | cholesterol, Diet and Disease, heart disease, Latest Nutritional Research, Naturopathic Medicine, Nutritional Supplements and Disease | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Dr. Gina Nick

Protect Local Farmers…Your Health May Depend on It

March 22, 2010

Below is a reprint from Food Democracy Now with a call to action to let the USDA and Department of Justice know that our local farmers must be protected.  Watch out for corporate control of your food! And, please consider a contribution to Food Democracy Now! They offer a balanced perspective on the agriculture industry and work diligently on our behalf to keep the US food supply safe and healthy.  The quality of the food we eat is one of the most important components to health and well-being.

In health,

-Dr. G

—
The evidence is in: America’s food system is broken. Every week we read about record-breaking food safety recalls, a spiraling childhood obesity epidemic, and the continued loss of independent family farmers.

All of these problems can be traced back to one thing: excessive consolidation by Big, corporate food. But change may be on the way.

Recently, the Departments of Justice and Agriculture held their first joint workshop here in Iowa to gather evidence of antitrust violations in food and agriculture.(1) We were encouraged by the workshop, the first of five to be held this year,(2) but also concerned that the same companies that have caused these problems were well represented on the panels, while the family farmers most negatively impacted by corporate food monopolies were only given the opportunity to speak after public officials had left the building.

Even though these workshops are an important first step, real family farmers must have a seat at the table. It will take all our voices to ensure that the Justice department holds giant agribusiness accountable.

Please join us and tell the Attorney General Eric Holder and Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack that it’s time to break up America’s corporate food monopolies before they do more harm.

http://fdn.actionkit.com/go/bust_up_big_food/124?akid=112.63486.P_0Wpl&t=7

The aisles of most American grocery stores give an overwhelming illusion of choice when it comes to our food. A closer look, however, quickly reveals that most of the meat, grain, milk — and even the grocery stores themselves — are all owned and controlled by just a few corporations.

The figures are startling:
• A single company (Monsanto) controls the seeds of 93% of soybeans and 80% of the corn grown in the U.S.(3)

• 4 companies (Tyson, Cargill, Swift & National Beef Packing Co.) control 83% of the beef packing industry(4)

• 4 companies (Smithfield, Tyson, Swift & Cargill) control 66% of the pork packing industry

For too long now, food and agricultural production has been consolidated into the hands of a few agribusiness giants. These companies dictate to us how our food is produced, how much farmers are paid for their crops and livestock and how much consumers pay for food.

Food Democracy Now! participated in last week’s workshop. We heard Attorney General Eric Holder talk about the “reckless deregulation that has restricted competition in agriculture” and promise that the Department of Justice, under his watch, was committed to “vigorous enforcement” of U.S. antitrust laws.

But given the power of the companies on the other side, we know that the change we need will not come easily. We must stand together and make our voices heard in favor of a fair and democratic food system!

Please support Secretary Vilsack and Attorney General Holder as they move forward. Join them today in pushing for real enforcement of U.S. antitrust laws and an end to America’s food monopolies. It only takes a moment. And after you’ve signed the petition, please ask your friends and family to do the same.

http://fdn.actionkit.com/go/bust_up_big_food/124?akid=112.63486.P_0Wpl&t=9

P.S. The next hearing will be in Normal, Alabama on May 21st 2010, and will focus on the poultry industry, followed by a hearing on the notoriously concentrated dairy industry in Madison, Wisconsin on June 7th. We’ll be sure to keep you informed.

Sources:
1. US pledges to probe, bust agribusiness monopolies, Reuters, March 12, 2010
http://fdn.actionkit.com/go/125?akid=112.63486.P_0Wpl&t=12

2. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division, Public Workshops, Agriculture and Antitrust Enforcement Issues in Our 21st Century Economy
http://fdn.actionkit.com/go/94?akid=112.63486.P_0Wpl&t=14

3. Monsanto’s dominance draws antitrust inquiry, Patented seeds are go-to for farmers, who decry their fast-growing price, The Washington Post, November 29, 2009
http://fdn.actionkit.com/go/95?akid=112.63486.P_0Wpl&t=16

4. 2007 Concentration of Agricultural Markets report, compiled by Mary Hendrickson and William Heffernan of University of Missouri Department of Rural Sociology.

Leave a Comment » | agriculture, Diet and Disease, Healthcare Politics, Latest Nutritional Research | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Dr. Gina Nick

Take Action Today on the Healthcare Bill!

March 16, 2010

US Healthcare Bill- Make Your Voice Heard!

I am reprinting an action statement from the Alliance for Natural Health USA about the upcoming vote on the healthcare bill.  It lists the elected representatives that still have the potential to vote “NO” on the bill as it is written.  We may only have until this Thursday to make our voices heard, so please, if you are interested in maintaining your freedom in healthcare choices and access to natural healthcare, TAKE ACTION now!

In health,

Dr. G

—

Make Your Voice Heard on the Healthcare Bills!

March 16, 2010

After months of negotiating and back-door dealing, Congress is set to pass industry-friendly healthcare legislation at the expense of consumer choice. Please contact your elected representative today and tell him or her to vote NO on the healthcare bill!

The House of Representatives is expected to pass the Senate healthcare bill along with separate “fixes” as early as Thursday. If passed, the Senate will then vote on the fixes shortly thereafter. This may be your last chance to make your voice heard.

There are a few key representatives who will make or break the healthcare bill, because for one reason or another, their votes remain uncertain and subject to change. If you see your elected official listed below, it’s particularly critical you contact them today and tell them to vote no on this version of healthcare reform.

Members who voted no last time but haven’t said what they would do this time include:

Rep. Brian Baird (D-WA)

Rep. Rick Boucher (D-VA)

Rep. Bart Gordon (D-TN)

Rep. Suzanne Kosmas (D-FL)

Rep. Frank Kratovil (D-MD)

Rep. Michael McMahon (D-NY)

Rep. Walt Minnick (D-ID)

Rep. Scott Murphy (D-NY)

Rep. Glenn Nye (D-VA)

Rep. John Tanner (D-TN)

Members who voted yes last time but are in districts unfriendly to this bill and might be swayed to vote no:

Rep. Mike Arcuri (D-NY)

Rep. Tim Bishop (D-NY)

Rep. Christopher Carney (D-PA)

Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper (D-PA)

Rep. Steven Driehaus (D-OH)

Rep. Bill Foster (D-IL)

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ)

Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL)

Rep. John Hall (D-NY)

Rep. Baron Hill (D-IN)

Rep. Jim Hines (D-CT)

Rep. Steve Kagen (D-WI)

Rep. Paul Kanjorski (D-PA)

Rep. Mary Jo Kilroy (D-OH)

Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick (D-AZ)

Rep. Dan Maffei (D-NY)

Rep. Jerry McNerney (D-CA)

Rep. Harry Mitchell (D-AZ)

Rep. Alan Mollohan (D-WV)

Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-PA)

Rep. Bill Owens (D-NY)

Rep. Tom Perriello (D-VA)

Rep. Gary Peters (D-MI)

Rep. Earl Pomeroy (D-ND)

Rep. Nick Rahall (D-WV)

Rep. John Salazar (D-CO)

Rep. Mark Schauer (D-MI)

Rep. Carol Shea-Porter (D-NH)

Rep. Zach Space (D-OH)

Rep. John Spratt (D-SC)

Rep. Dina Titus (D-NV)

This is a list of representatives who are uncertain because of their concerns about abortion (some of these will overlap with last list):

Rep. Anh Cao (R, LA)

Rep. Jerry Costello (D-IL)

Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper (D-PA)

Rep. Joe Donnelly (D-IN)

Rep. Steve Driehaus (D-OH)

Rep. Brad Ellsworth (D-IN)

Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-OH)

Rep. Dale Kildee (D-MI)

Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-IL)

Rep. James Oberstar (D-MN)

Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI)

Rep. Charles Wilson (D-OH)

A brief recap of why we oppose this bill:

1) The government defines health and healthcare and health insurance. This is an open invitation for special interests such as drug and medical equipment makers and even the American Medial Association (AMA) to take even tighter control of your medical options.

2) The government forces you (on penalty of fine and even jail) to buy government approved health insurance policies that will not provide any access to natural medicine. Catastrophic policies, health savings accounts (HSAs), and other ways to buy natural medicine services will be destroyed.

3) Health records will be electronic and neither you nor your doctor will have any privacy (the privacy of the doctor-patient relationship is not protected).

4) The language is ambiguous, but it may be illegal even to pay your doctor separately in cash for natural medical services.

5) The bills are paid for with “smoke and mirrors” and will increase the budget deficit over time, but we leave these considerations to others.

Please contact your elected representatives (both senate and house but especially the house right now). Although the house will vote first, the senate may follow immediately thereafter, so it is best to send a message to both chambers right now. Please do not delay. Tell your elected representatives to vote NO on the healthcare bill!

Gretchen DuBeau

Executive Director

Leave a Comment » | Healthcare Politics, Naturopathic Medicine | Tagged: , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Dr. Gina Nick

Your Voice Was Heard! McCain Withdraws Support of Dangerous Supplement Bill

March 8, 2010

Supplement Safety Act Loses Senator Support

Thank you to those who took action and contacted Senator McCain to request that he reconsider supporting his new bill that threatened to block your access to natural medicines. According to Alliance for Natural Health USA, Senator McCain was embarrassed by an ad they placed, that pointed out that he was misrepresenting and did not seem to understand his own bill. McCain met with Senator Orin Hatch, who is a strong supporter of natural medicine, and shortly thereafter news came that he was withdrawing his support of the Dietary Supplement Safety Act.

A word of caution…it is likely that another, modified version of this Bill creeps up and we will be watching for this.  In the meantime, I want to extend my gratitude to those of you that were willing to take action and make your voice heard. It is the ONLY way we are going to see genuine, lasting change in our healthcare system.

Let’s start making the  healthcare needs of the people, and of  the future generations known. What I am seeing in practice is that the newest generation is suffering from unhealthy habits of at least the past two generations (e.g. poor diet, lack of exercise, more stress, exposure to industrial chemicals and pesticides, synthetic hormones, introduction of more chemicals in the food supply).

This means that genetically,  they are more vulnerable to chronic illness, which is an area of healthcare where our current system fails to provide real solutions.

These children are much more sensitive to the effects of poor diet, chemicals in the environment, and high potency medications.  They will not  benefit from access to the current system of healthcare that is heavily focused on prescription medications and the suppression of symptoms. The younger generation, and future generations will be seeking to address the root cause of their symptoms-be it mental, emotional and/or physical.

It is time to design a new healthcare bill, where the focus is on optimal health, the principles and practice of naturopathic medicine, treating the cause rather then masking the symptoms, detoxification, and working with and respecting the body’s innate ability to heal itself, given the proper support.

In health,

–Dr. G

Leave a Comment » | Latest Nutritional Research, Naturopathic Medicine, Nutritional Supplements and Disease, Pharmaceuticals | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Dr. Gina Nick

Protect Your Access to Quality Nutritional Supplements

February 28, 2010

Protect Your Access to Safe and Effective Dietary Supplements

I am reprinting an urgent Action Alert from Citizens for Health. Senators McCain and Dorgan have introduced a destructive bill that threatens your access to safe and effective nutritional supplements. I urge you to read the bill and take action today!

-Dr. Gina

S. 3002 Must Be Overhauled or Scrapped – Act Now!

Senate Bill 3002 (S. 3002) is the worst bill we at Citizens for Health (CFH) have seen in the last 34 years, since the “Vitamin Volstead” Act was introduced.

Introduced by Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Byron Dorgan (D-ND) on February 4th as the “Dietary Supplement Safety Act of 2010,” it is designed, says the bill preamble, to “more effectively regulate dietary supplements that may pose safety risks unknown to consumers.”

The bill follows a surge of anti-doping initiatives and announcements dating back to September 29, 2009 (when the U.S. Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Drugs heard the testimony of the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency USADA), and to a December 2nd, 2009 USADA press conference. If passed, the proposed bill would:

Dramatically harm consumers;
Cripple the nutritional products industry; and
Do absolutely nothing to stem the tide of laboratory-concocted, performance-enhancing drug hybrids masquerading as dietary supplements.

Once this bill is shelved, CFH will be happy to work with Senators McCain and Dorgan to come up with solutions directed at increasing and improving U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) enforcement against labs-for-hire that spike food products with steroids and other banned drugs.

Click here to send your letter today, and urge Congress to preserve DSHEA and your access to supplements by opposing S. 3002!

9 Comments | Latest Nutritional Research, Nutritional Supplements and Disease, Prevention | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Dr. Gina Nick

The National Library of Medicine Censors Research on Nutritional Medicine- Take Action Today!

January 30, 2010

Medical Research Bias

Below is an interesting news release provided by Orthomolecular Medicine News Service that demonstrates the clear and unfortunate bias against nutritional and natural medical therapies from the world’s most reputable and trusted medical research site- Medline.  It is not surprising but it is disappointing, given that medical writers for all of our major news media outlets rely on this research site to create their reports on health.   This bias is not to be taken lightly.  The research both in clinical practice and in the lab, does exist, that shows the efficacy of using natural and nutritional therapies to prevent and treat disease, especially chronic diseases that place the greatest financial burden on our country.  The healthcare industry is broken. Using Naturopathic Medicine and other natural and environmentally friendly medical modalities proven effective, will contribute to a new, simple, realistic and affordable healthcare system in our country- a system that can serve as a demonstration to the rest of the world of a better way to mange health, for the betterment of humanity and the planet.

In health,

Dr. G

—

Want to be a MEDLINE Information Censor?
The National Library of Medicine Needs You!

Would you like to dictate what nutritional research people may or may not access? Why not join the NLM’s Literature Selection Technical Review Committee?
We think a good preparatory step is to take the Medline Censorship Aptitude Test (MED-CENT).
Not to worry; it’s multiple choice.

First question: Which of the following research papers is NOT indexed by the National Library of Medicine’s Medline?

A) Olfactory responses and field attraction of mosquitoes to volatiles from Limburger cheese and human foot odor. (J Vector Ecol, 1998)

B) Heated socks maintain toe temperature but not always skin blood flow as mean skin temperature falls. (Aviat Space Environ Med, 2003)

C) Jefferson JW, Thompson TD. Rhinotillexomania (nose-picking): psychiatric disorder or habit? (J Clin Psychiatry, 1995)

D) Pauling L, Rath M. An orthomolecular theory of human health and disease. (J Orthomolecular Medicine, 1991)

Answer: Only choice “D” is not available on Medline. The others most certainly are. Search each one and see for yourself at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/ or http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez

Let’s try another: Which of these studies is NOT indexed by Medline?


A) Psychophysiological responding during script-driven imagery in people reporting abduction by space aliens. (Psychol Sci, 2004)

B) The eyebrow frown: a salient social signal. (Emotion, 2002)

C) Staring at one side of the face increases blood flow on that side of the face. (Psychophysiology, 2004)

D) Rath M, Pauling L. Solution to the puzzle of human cardiovascular disease: Its primary cause is ascorbate deficiency leading to the deposition of lipoprotein(a) and fibrinogen/fibrin in the vascular wall. (J Orthomolecular Medicine, 1991)

Answer: “D” is not on Medline. All the rest are.

Ready? Select the study below that is NOT on Medline:


A) Espresso kiosks can be profitable addition to hospital foodservice. (Health Foodserv Mag, 2000)

B) Espresso maker’s wrist. (West J Med, 1990)

C) Characterization of particles in cream cheese. (J Dairy Sci, 2004)

D) Rath M, Pauling L. Case Report: Lysine/ascorbate related amelioration of angina pectoris. (J Orthomolecular Medicine, 1991)

Yes, the study that Medline does not think is important enough for you to see is choice “D”. The others are all indexed online by NLM at taxpayer expense.

Next:

A) The Easter bunny in October: is it disguised as a duck? (Percept Mot Skills, 1993)

B) Increasing the portion size of a packaged snack increases energy intake in men and women. (Appetite, 2004)

C) A piece of my mind. Reflections while listening to the Glazunov Saxophone Concerto. (JAMA, 2003)

D) Rath M, Pauling L. Apoprotein(a) is an adhesive protein. (J Orthomolecular Medicine, 1991)

You guessed it: “D” is not on Medline.

One last chance, now:


A) How dogs navigate to catch Frisbees. (Psychol. Sci, 2004)

B) Effect on tipping of barman drawing a sun on the bottom of customers’ checks. (Psychol Rep, 2000)

C) An objective evaluation of the waterproofing qualities, ease of insertion and comfort of commonly available earplugs. (Clin Otolaryngol, 2004)

D) Hoffer A, Pauling L. Hardin Jones biostatistical analysis of mortality data for a second set of cohorts of cancer patients with a large fraction surviving at the termination of the study and a comparison of survival times of cancer patients receiving large regular oral doses of vitamin C and other nutrients with similar patients not receiving these doses. (J Orthomolecular Medicine, 1993)

Choice “D” is not indexed by Medline. The others are. Yes, they really are. Just type in the title at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/ or http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez

If you got all the above items right, you are well qualified to become a member of the NLM’s Literature Selection Technical Review Committee, because you can discern what research should and should not be available to the public.

Censoring Linus Pauling

If you look carefully at the first four questions, you will see that four of Linus Pauling’s papers appeared in the Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine in just one year. That year was 1991. Two years after this, JOM was reviewed by the National Library of Medicine’s Literature Selection Technical Review Committee. NLM uses a point scale of zero to 5, with five being the highest recommendation for indexing, and zero being the lowest. On March 4, 1993, the Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine received a “0.0” score.

One cannot escape the significance of such judgment. After all, “0.0” is not merely a low mark. “0.0” represents an absolute dearth of merit. And “zero point zero” states it so flatly as to leave no room for alternate interpretations.

To this day, after additional reviews, Medline still does not include the Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine.

To read the Linus Pauling papers that Medline decided rate a “0.0”: http://orthomolecular.org/library/jom/1991/toc3.shtml and http://orthomolecular.org/library/jom/1993/toc3.shtml
For free online access to 600 more full-text papers from the Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine: http://orthomolecular.org/library/jom/

To personally thank your National Library of Medicine for keeping all this information from the taxpayer:
Ms Betsy Humphreys, Deputy Director, NLM
email: betsy.humphreys@nih.gov or betsy_humphreys@nlm.nih.gov
phone: 301-496-6661

You can also call the NLM Customer Service desk at 1-888-FIND-NLM (1-888-346-3656). Remember to be polite, because, after all, they are the “World’s Largest Medical Library.” http://www.nlm.nih.gov/nlmhome.html
Nutritional Medicine is Orthomolecular Medicine

Orthomolecular medicine uses safe, effective nutritional therapy to fight illness. For more information: http://www.orthomolecular.org

The peer-reviewed Orthomolecular Medicine News Service is a non-profit and non-commercial informational resource.
Editorial Review Board:
Carolyn Dean, M.D., N.D. (Canada)
Damien Downing, M.D. (United Kingdom)
Michael Gonzalez, D.Sc., Ph.D. (Puerto Rico)
Steve Hickey, Ph.D. (United Kingdom)
James A. Jackson, PhD (USA)
Bo H. Jonsson, MD, Ph.D (Sweden)
Thomas Levy, M.D., J.D. (USA)
Jorge R. Miranda-Massari, Pharm.D. (Puerto Rico)
Erik Paterson, M.D. (Canada)
Gert E. Shuitemaker, Ph.D. (Netherlands)

OMNS free subscription link http://orthomolecular.org/subscribe.html
OMNS archive link http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/index.shtml are included.

2 Comments | Latest Nutritional Research, Naturopathic Medicine, Nutritional Supplements and Disease, Orthomolecular Medicine, Prevention | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by Dr. Gina Nick

Do Vitamins Cause Cancer?

November 30, 2009

Weighing the benefits of nutritional supplements

I am reprinting a press release from the Orthomolecular Medicine News Service that discusses a newly published study, sure to get press, that implies that a simple folate supplement increases cancer rates in patients who are diagnosed with heart disease.  This press release does an excellent job of helping readers read between the lines when articles are released that are biased against natural health products.  I encourage you to read and listen to all health related discussions and advertisements through a similar, more well-informed lens.

Yours in health,

–Dr. G

—

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Orthomolecular Medicine News Service, November 29, 2009
 

Does Everything Cause Cancer, Even Vitamins?
Folate, B-12 and Cigarettes: Guess Who the Real Culprit Is

(OMNS, November 29, 2009) A newly released study suggests that folate supplements can increase cancer rates in patients who have heart disease [1]. But the data for the study was not collected to test the effect of supplemental folate on cancer, and appears to be biased by the high fraction of smokers and by the low levels of supplements given. All of the groups in the study had high rates of cancer, whether or not they took a folate supplement. The suggested increase in cancer risk is very small, only 1.6%. Because of these problems, the report appears to be biased by uncontrolled factors in the data collection and analysis.

The study combined the data from two recent trials performed in Norway that tested the effect of folate and vitamin B-12, two closely related B vitamins, on the homocysteine levels in the blood and on overall mortality [2,3]. The rationale for these trials was that high levels of homocysteine are known to be a risk factor associated with atherosclerosis, and are sometimes associated with low folate levels [4,5]. Folate and vitamin B-12 are important for growth because they involved in the synthesis of DNA. Folate is crucial for the prevention of spina bifida and other developmental defects in babies. Folate is also known to prevent the occurrence of cancer, and to reduce atherosclerosis and related heart problems [6,7].

Another reason to be cautious about the conclusion of the study is that most of the cancers detected were slow-progressing and would not be expected to be initiated by a relatively low dose of an essential vitamin, such as folate, over the 3-year period of the study. It would appear much more likely that the vitamin supplements actually reduced new cancer incidence as shown in previous studies [7], but that any cancers that showed up later were already initiated but undetected at the start of the study [8]. The real cause of cancer may be connected to the heart disease in these subjects because of their long history of smoking and ill health.

In these two trials, the subjects were selected for having heart disease and were therefore quite ill. The vitamin amounts were small: 0.8 milligrams/day of folic acid; 0.4 mg/day of vitamin B-12, and 40 mg/day vitamin B-6. These amounts are low by comparison with other studies, where commonly much larger amounts of folate and vitamin B12 are given (40 mg/day folic acid, 2 mg/day of vitamin B12) [9]. Orthomolecular (nutritional) physicians maintain that larger nutrient doses are more effective in preventing illness than are small doses.

Indeed, the data from the two trials showed a cancer increase that was non-significant. That’s right, it could be merely random variation. This is important. One reason this is likely is that the point where a subject stopped being considered as part of the statistical significance was either any cause of death, or a heart-related event, or a stroke [2,3]. Thus subjects who died of unrelated causes were tallied in the statistics, which would tend to obscure any effects of the treatment. Other uncontrolled factors, for example the general ill health of the subjects, or behavioral factors like the amount of smoking, very likely contributed to the variability. In an attempt to give more statistical significance the study combined the data from both trials to double the number of subjects. A claimed increase in cancer due to increased folate levels is not borne out by statistics for the population of the US where folate levels have increased recently , because the cancer rates have significantly dropped [7].

Interestingly, health was actually improved in the subjects that received folate plus vitamin B-12, because for them the rates of acute hospitalization for angina and the incidence of stroke were lower by about 4% than for the placebo group.

In conclusion, any apparent increase in cancer risk is close to the expected random variability in the cancer rate, implying that much or all of any alleged “vitamin problem” is purely due to chance.

Findings due to chance are not scientific findings. Isn’t it interesting that a major journal (Journal of the American Medical Association) would publish this research? Perhaps nonsignificant data are acceptable if you have an anti-vitamin orientation. Researchers previously found that in major medical journals, more pharmaceutical company advertising resulted in the journal having more articles with “negative conclusions about dietary supplement safety.” [10] JAMA carries a large number of pharmaceutical ads.

Bottom line: vitamins do not cause cancer. Smoking does.

References:

[1] Ebbing M, Bonaa KH, Nygard O, Arnesen E, Ueland PM, Nordrehaug JE, Rasmussen K, Njolstad I, Refsum H, Nilsen DW, Tverdal A, Meyer K, Vollset SE (2009) Cancer incidence and mortality after treatment with folic acid and vitamin B12. JAMA 301: 2119-2126.

[2] Bonaa KH, Njolstad I, Ueland PM, Schirmer H, Tverdal A, Steigen T, Wang H, Nordrehaug JE, Arnesen E, Rasmussen K; NORVIT Trial (2006) Homocysteine lowering and cardiovascular events after acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 354:1578-88.

[3] Ebbing M, Bleie O, Ueland PM, Nordrehaug JE, Nilsen DW, Vollset SE, Refsum H, Pedersen EK, Nygard O.(2008) Mortality and cardiovascular events in patients treated with homocysteine-lowering B vitamins after coronary angiography: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 300:795-804.

[4] McCully KS. (2009) Chemical pathology of homocysteine. IV. Excitotoxicity, oxidative stress, endothelial dysfunction, and inflammation. Ann Clin Lab Sci. 39:219-232.

[5] Terwecoren A, Steen E, Benoit D, Boon P, Hemelsoet D. (2009) Ischemic stroke and hyperhomocysteinemia: truth or myth? Acta Neurol Belg. 109:181-188.

[6] Imamura A, Murakami R, Takahashi R, Cheng XW, Numaguchi Y, Murohara T, Okumura K. (2009) Low folate levels may be an atherogenic factor regardless of homocysteine levels in young healthy nonsmokers. Metabolism. 2009 Nov 13. [Epub ahead of print]

[7] Drake BF, Colditz GA (2009) Assessing cancer prevention studies: a matter of time. JAMA 302:2152-2153.

[8] Kim YI. (2008) Folic acid supplementation and cancer risk: point. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 17:2220-2225.

[9] Jamison RL, Hartigan P, Kaufman JS, Goldfarb DS, Warren SR, Guarino PD, Gaziano JM; Veterans Affairs Site Investigators. (2007) Effect of homocysteine lowering on mortality and vascular disease in advanced chronic kidney disease and end-stage renal disease: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 298:1163-1170.

[10] Pharmaceutical advertising biases journals against vitamin supplements. Orthomolecular Medicine News Service, February 5, 2009. http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v05n02.shtml

Nutritional Medicine is Orthomolecular Medicine

Orthomolecular medicine uses safe, effective nutritional therapy to fight illness. For more information: http://www.orthomolecular.org

The peer-reviewed Orthomolecular Medicine News Service is a non-profit and non-commercial informational resource.

Editorial Review Board:

Carolyn Dean, M.D., N.D.
Damien Downing, M.D.
Michael Gonzalez, D.Sc., Ph.D.
Steve Hickey, Ph.D.
James A. Jackson, PhD
Bo H. Jonsson, MD, Ph.D
Thomas Levy, M.D., J.D.
Jorge R. Miranda-Massari, Pharm.D.
Erik Paterson, M.D.
Gert E. Shuitemaker, Ph.D.

Andrew W. Saul, Ph.D., Editor and contact person. Email: omns@orthomolecular.org

OMNS free subscription link http://orthomolecular.org/subscribe.html OMNS archive link http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/index.shtml

12 Comments | heart disease, Latest Nutritional Research, Nutritional Supplements and Disease, Orthomolecular Medicine | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Dr. Gina Nick

Help Bring Integrity Back to the Agricultural Industry

October 29, 2009
It appears that the USDA is appointing key executives with questionable backgrounds, and an apparent bias towards
Perfect tomato.

Agribusiness in question

the use of Genetically Modified crops and pesticides.  I am reprinting below a call for action from Food Democracy Now! which outlines the current concerns and offers an easy action step for you to take to help bring integrity back to the US agricultural industry.  Please let your voice be heard and also please join me in donating money to Food Democracy Now! so they can continue with the good work they are doing on our behalf.

–Dr. Gina

—
President Obama has found himself with some strange bedfellows lately.

While on the campaign trail in Iowa, Barack Obama boasted, “We’ll tell ConAgra that it’s not the Department of Agribusiness. We’re going to put the people’s interests ahead of the special interests.”1 Despite that promise, it seems that ConAgra’s friends at Monsanto and CropLife are still finding their way into the USDA.

Last month, President Obama nominated two “Big Ag” power brokers–Roger Beachy and Islam Siddiqui–to key agency positions, putting agribusiness executives in charge of our country’s agricultural research and trade policy. Please join us in telling the President that this isn’t the change we voted for. We don’t want Big Ag running the show any more.  

Siddiqui’s confirmation hearing is set for next week. Please help us reach our goal of 50,000 signatures to make a real impact.

http://fdn.actionkit.com/go/65?akid=35.63486.sfhQtX&t=1

Obama’s first agribusiness selection is Roger Beachy, to be head of the USDA’s newly created National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA). Beachy is the founding president of the Donald Danforth Plant Science Center in St. Louis, MO. It may sound innocuous, but the Danforth Center is essentially the non-profit arm of GMO seed giant Monsanto; Monsanto’s CEO sits on its board, and the company provides considerable funding for the Center’s operations.2

As the head of the USDA’s new research arm, formerly known as the Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CREES), Beachy is responsible for deciding how U.S. research dollars will be spent in agriculture.3 Translation: more research on biotech, less research on how to scale sustainable and organic agriculture.

Unfortunately, Beachy has already started work at the USDA, but the next nominee—Islam Siddiqui—still must be confirmed by the U.S.Senate. Siddiqui, the Vice President of Science and Regulatory Affairs at CropLife America, was recently nominated to be the Chief Agricultural Negotiator at the Office of the US Trade Representative.4 Amazingly, when Michele Obama planted her “organic” garden on the White House lawn, Siddiqui’s CropLife MidAmerica sent the First Lady a letter saying that it made them “shudder”.5

During his career, Siddiqui spent over 3 years as a pesticide lobbyist, an Undersecretary at the USDA and a VP at CropLife. In defending Siddiqui, the White House has stated that he played a key role in helping establish the country’s first organic standards.6 What they neglect to mention, though, is that those original organic standards would have allowed irradiation, sewage sludge and GMOs to undermine organic integrity! The standards were so watered down that 230,000 people signed a petition for them to be changed, which they eventually were.7

Fortunately, the organic community stopped Siddiqui and his cronies then, and we need your help now to do it again. If Siddiqui’s nomination is allowed to go through, then agribusiness will continue to control the seeds, the science, and the distribution of global food and agriculture.

Please join Food Democracy Now! and a broad coalition of other groups, in calling on President Obama to keep his campaign promise of closing the revolving door between agribusiness and his administration.  

Please click here to add your voice.  

http://fdn.actionkit.com/go/65?akid=35.63486.sfhQtX&t=1

Thanks for standing with us and our coalition partners from across the country, including: The Pesticide Action Network (PAN), National Family Farm Coalition, Food & Water Watch, Farmworker’s Association of Florida, Institute of Agriculture & Trade Policy, Greenpeace and the Center for Food Safety in calling for President Obama to live up to his promises to put people’s interests ahead of special interests

Sustainably Yours,

Dave, Lisa and the Food Democracy Now! Team.

If you’d like to see Food Democracy Now!’s grassroots work continue, please consider donating. Your donation of $5 or more will help us continue our work. We appreciate your support! http://fdn.actionkit.com/go/25?akid=35.63486.sfhQtX&t=1

Sources:

1. Obama slams corporate agriculture, two Illinois firms, The Chicago Tribune, November 10, 2007
http://fdn.actionkit.com/go/58?akid=35.63486.sfhQtX&t=1

2. Another Monsanto man in a key USDA post?, Grist, September 24, 2009
http://fdn.actionkit.com/go/59?akid=35.63486.sfhQtX&t=1

3. A New Direction on Research at the USDA? The Experts Weigh In, The Huffington Post, October 15, 2009
http://fdn.actionkit.com/go/60?akid=35.63486.sfhQtX&t=1

4. Obama’s attempt to tap an agrichemical-industry flack runs into trouble, Grist, October 10, 2009
http://fdn.actionkit.com/go/61?akid=35.63486.sfhQtX&t=1

5. Michelle’s green garden upsets pesticide makers, The First Post, April 23, 2009
http://fdn.actionkit.com/go/62?akid=35.63486.sfhQtX&t=1

6. Agriculture nomination steams greens, Politico, October 10, 2009
http://fdn.actionkit.com/go/63?akid=35.63486.sfhQtX&t=1

7. USDA Enters Debate on Organic Label Law, The New York Times, February 23, 2003 http://fdn.actionkit.com/go/72?akid=35.63486.sfhQtX&t=1

1 Comment | agriculture, organic foods, Prevention | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Dr. Gina Nick

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »