Disease Proof

Diet-Blog passes on The Real Diet Story. Take a look:

Right on the money! “Diets” flop long term. Dr. Fuhrman tells us why:

Unfortunately, most weight-loss plans either don’t work or offer only minor, usually temporary, benefits. There are plenty of “rules and counting” diets, diet drugs, high-protein programs, canned shakes, and other fads that might enable you to lose some weight for a period of time. The problem is that you can’t stay on these programs forever.

And yet the fad diet industry continues to make millions.

The New York Times offers up this great graphic showing America’s food habits over time. More from Bill Marsh:

Wow, it’s hard to believe that our vegetable consumption is actually up. Could have fooled me! Click here for the full graphic.

You know, you try to be optimistic. You hope people will start eating better, but then you find something like this and that notion is shot to hell. Via And I Am Not Lying:

Makes you wonder, how big of a death wish must a person have to concoct that monstrosity. I can actually feel my chest tightening!

• Researchers from University of Sydney in Australia have determined that playing outside is good for kids’ eyes; it helps prevent myopia or short-sightedness—published in Ophthalmology. The Hindustan Times reports:

In the study, 2367 12-year-old Australian school children underwent eye examinations and completed questionnaires about their daily activities.

The lowest rates of myopia were associated with the highest rates of outdoor activity, irrespective of how much near work, such as reading, the children did.

The children with the worst eyesight did lots of near work and spent very little time outside. Interestingly, the study found no benefit from playing sports indoors.

"The crucial factor was being outdoors. Time spent outdoors, as a protective factor, now appears to be the strongest environmental factor that has yet been documented,” Kathryn Rose of the University of Sydney in Australia said.

• A new study by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services shows immigrant children aren’t getting as much exercise as white U.S.-born children—it appears in the Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine. Via Reuters:

The researchers, led by Dr. Gopal K. Singh of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, report the findings in the Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine.

Past studies, the researchers note, have shown that immigrants to the U.S. often have certain "health advantages" over natives that tend to fade as they become more assimilated: traditional diets are replaced by fast food, leisure time is increasingly devoted to TV and computers.

The reverse seems to be true when it comes to physical activity. Research has suggested that immigrant adults tend to exercise more as they become more acculturated.

A similar pattern emerged in the current study. Singh's team found that rates of inactivity were highest among children who were foreign- born or had two foreign-born parents (18 percent and 15 percent, respectively); but children with one foreign-born parent were similar to children whose parents were both born in the U.S. (between 10 percent and 11 percent were inactive).

• According to researchers at the Division of Population Science at the Fox Chase Cancer Center in Cheltenham, Pennsylvania, exercise lowers the risk of colon cancer—printed in Patient Education and Counseling. More from Robert Preidt of HealthDay News:

Their analysis of survey data from 1,932 adults who answered questions about colon cancer risk found that only 15 percent said they used physical activity as a way of reducing their colon cancer risk. The findings were published in the August issue of Patient Education and Counseling.

Several factors may contribute to this lack of knowledge about the link between exercise and colon cancer risk.

"Patients may not be learning this information from their health-care providers and information regarding colon cancer prevention is not as well publicized as it could be," study co-author Elliott Coups said in a new release from the Center for the Advancement of Health.

Doctors may find it easier to tell patients about the general health benefits of exercise, rather than specifically referring to colon cancer, even if a patient has a family history of colon cancer or other risk factors for the disease.

Reuters reports that Britain will allow the sale of over-the-counter oral antibiotics. Anyone older than 16 will be able to buy the azithromycin pill. From the article:

It is designed for use by people who have tested positive for the sexually transmitted infection and have no symptoms. The drug will also be available on an over-the-counter (OTC) basis for their sexual partners.

Up to 70 percent of people who have chlamydia exhibit no symptoms but risk serious long-term health complications, including infertility and ectopic pregnancy.

"Today's move means that symptom-free people diagnosed with chlamydia and their partner will be able to get convenient effective treatment from their local pharmacy," said June Raine, MHRA director of vigilance and risk management of medicines.

The British government has taken a lead in Europe in encouraging self-medication, as a way to increase patient choice and cut state healthcare bills.

The country already allows OTC sales of cholesterol-lowering and migraine drugs, as well as antibiotic eyedrops.

"The MHRA is keen to support the availability of more medicines over-the-counter, where it is safe to do so, and we wish to move on to new areas such as prevention and chronic disease management," Raine said in a statement.

Now, we’ve all read the reports about antibiotic-resistant bacteria and viruses. Wouldn’t over-the-counter antibiotics exacerbate the situation? More from Dr. Fuhrman:

Drug companies are a big part of this problem. They promote the use of their products through widespread advertising and the practice of giving free samples of the more potent, broad-spectrum antibiotics to doctors. The more widely these newer (and often ten times more expensive) antibiotics are used, the greater the chances that the bacteria will develop resistance. Many patients don't think a doctor is doing his job if he doesn't prescribe antibiotics or other medication. If he doesn't prescribe the medication they want, some patients actually will look for another doctor who will. Most doctors perpetuate this problem because they give in to the pressure to prescribe antibiotics. They like to appear that they are offering an important and necessary service by writing prescriptions.

What’s especially troubling is less than a month ago British doctors were urged to cutback on how many antibiotics they prescribe—weird?

• If you live in NYC and you think all those paper takeout menus stuffed into your door jambs are a giant eco-waste. Good news! New York State will start enforcing a law that prohibits the placing unsolicited materials. Via Sewell Chan of CityRoom:

Advertisers who violate the law face fines from $250 for a first offense to $1,000 for repeat violators.

The “lawn litter” legislation was sponsored by State Senator Frank Padavan and Assemblyman Mark S. Weprin, both of Queens, where complaints about “lawn litter” have been particularly acute.

The property owner’s sign must be at least five inches tall and seven inches wide, and display the following language in legible letters at least one inch in size: “Do Not Place Unsolicited Advertising Materials On This Property.”

• Worried that you’re underwear isn’t green? A Sri Lankan firm has announced that it will become the world's first carbon-neutral clothes factory. More from the World Business Council of Sustainable Development:

AT A SPANKING new lingerie factory in Thulhiriya, a short drive from Colombo, Sri Lanka's capital, senior managers wear T-shirts. This is not because MAS Holdings, the country's biggest apparel company, which recently opened the factory, is a dress-down sort of a firm. It is because the factory has no air-conditioning. Instead it uses evaporative cooling, which leaves the workplace around four degrees hotter than air-conditioning would—but uses much less energy.

The factory has many energy-saving features. Its carefully designed windows provide enough natural light for workers stitching bras. Its turf roofs provide a cooling shade. Overall it uses 40% less energy than an ordinary factory of the same size. And the electricity it uses is from renewable sources: 90% from a hydro-power plant and 10% from on-site solar panels. MAS reckons it has built the world's first carbon-neutral clothes factory.

It was built at the instigation of Britain's biggest clothier, Marks & Spencer (M&S), which contributed £200,000 ($400,000) towards the cost of the solar panels and design. The "green" underwear that MAS is now making at the factory for M&S will reach British high streets in June, and will cost no more than existing garments.

• I know that I have been driving less now that gas is a BILLION dollars a gallon. Green Living Tips points out that gas prices should indeed spark lifestyle changes. Take a look:

While gas prices are retreating somewhat now, people need to understand that the recent hikes were a tap on the shoulder; a perhaps final hint that we need to alter our lifestyles dramatically. Nature has a funny way of working - all things must be kept in balance and sometimes it will deliver a direct slap in the face, other times via other mediums.

The point is that all things are connected in Nature and for us to believe we have tamed it is a massive mistake. Whether through political unrest, peak oil or environmental disaster; the days of cheap fossil fuel are certainly numbered and that's probably a good thing as otherwise we'd just choke on our own hyperconsumption.

In that aspect, we're very much like children. Give a small child a bag of candy and tell them they can only have one piece a day, but it's up to them to control their consumption - and watch what happens :). Nature is the parent, and like any good parent, it will monitor and discipline us - harshly if we don't get the hint.

Christina Applegate’s diagnosis of breast cancer at age 36, brings to our awareness the question, why now, after so many millions spent on cancer research, do so many women still get and die of breast cancer? This diagnosis in such a young celebrity will incite a new media frenzy for more donations for cancer research. Cancer research means more testing for new drugs. I doubt any significant reduction in cancer deaths will result as long as we ignore causation and still expect to discover new poisons to defeat cancer. Deaths from breast cancer have increased throughout the last century and modern medical care has done little to halt this trend.

Imagine if that money was instead spent on educating the public about the environmental and nutritional causes of cancer. We could slash breast cancer rates by 70 to 90 percent if the money that went to cancer research (almost exclusively drug research) instead went to fund a huge publicity campaign to beat cancer at its roots. How many people know, childhood diets are the main cause of adult cancers? I have studied this subject for years, read thousands of studies and wrote a book about it called Disease-Proof Your Child. However, I learned not many people care about this subject. Knowledge about real cancer prevention is not politically correct and the spread of this message is unlikely to happen as the social, economic and political climate in the modern world revolves around promotion of processed foods and dairy products as the center of childhood nutritional practices. It is blasphemy to produce scientific studies that expose our present day feeding practices as cancer-causing. This message is not what people want to hear, they want a magic pill. Information about cancer causation does not fly in the media.

Flip around the dial, listen to the discussions about cancer in the media and read the articles. Do any of them bring up diet as the cause of cancer? Do the television personalities discuss that over 60 percent of food consumed in America is junk food? That’s right, we have crossed over the 60 percent line, white flour, (pasta, bagels, crackers) sweeteners, oils, chips, processed cereals, soft drinks and other junk foods are the vast majority of what we eat. Add cheese and other dairy foods, full of hormones and saturated fat, and you have a simple formula to create the cancer explosion we have seen in the modern world over the last 75 years. Put low micronutrient, high glycemic carbohydrates together with lots of cheese in your child’s mouth and boom, watch the cancer-creating experiment unfold (it usually takes about 40 years).

Now, while articles tussle with the argument of whether breast MRI’s or mammograms are more appropriate as an early detection tool, those in the know realize that there is no such thing as early detection and all cancers diagnosed with radiographic techniques must be large enough to be visualized with the human eye, so they have been there more than 10 years already.

When Christina Applegate’s publicist reports “it was not serious and caught in the early stage” we know that is not factual. Present medical science has no way of determining whether cells have spread outside the breast. A stage zero cancer means that it less than 2 centimeters and no cancer was found in the lymph nodes, however that still does not tell us that it was caught before cancer cells have spread. Most invasive breast cancers have seeded the body with cells by the time a mammogram or MRI can detect it. Negative lymph nodes on a biopsy does not tell us the cancer is still localized to the breast because a small number of cells are for practical purposes invisible.

There are both aggressive and non-aggressive breast cancers. It was not announced which type Ms. Applegate has, but the more aggressive breast cancers are more common in young women. They spread out from the breast at an earlier stage.

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a non-invasive breast cancer that spreads locally and there is no significant advantage to early detection because these cancers are not generally life threatening and can be detected later when they are larger with a good prognosis. Hopefully Christina has this type. Infiltrating ductal carcinoma is an example of breast cancer that is more aggressive.

Genetics plays a minor role, not the major role. Dietary practices have been identified by scientific studies as the primary cause of breast cancers. The countries with the highest incidence of cancers of the breast are in North America, Western Europe and Australia, while in contrast, the occurrence is lowest in Southeast Asia.1 For example, when compared to the United States, Laos, Cambodia, and Thailand have only one-twentieth the amount of breast cancer in the 50-75 age bracket. Breast and Prostate cancer are the most prevalent cancers in America.

Diets lower in animal products (especially cheese) and higher in unrefined plant foods account for these dramatic differences. When people from a low risk country migrate to the United States, their cancer rate increases considerably and the cancer rate in their offspring jumps up to match other Americans. This demonstrates that the lower incidence of these cancers is not due to a lower genetic susceptibility in Asians, but rather due to the exposure to Western dietary practices.2 Plant-derived micronutrients reduce toxic stress and arm the body’s defenses against cancer.

The growing body, with its dividing cells, is at greater risk when exposed to all types of negative and toxic influences. In adults, our valuable genetic material (DNA) is wound up in a tight ball, like the rubber bands on the inside of a golf ball. When we are young and cells are replicating and growing, the DNA unwinds, exposing more of its surface. This makes it more susceptible to damage from toxic exposure. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, infants and toddlers have a ten times greater cancer risk than adults when exposed to gene-damaging chemicals.3 In a similar manner, an unhealthy diet can do substantially more damage to a young body than an adult one. The fact is, the earlier in life, the greater the potential for damage.

The idea that eating an anti-cancer diet in our childhood is more important in determining cancer risk than waiting to eat healthy as an adult, has been tested in animals by Dr. Jerald Silverman of the Comprehensive Cancer Center at Ohio State with a grant from the American Institute for Cancer Research. He chose to study a strain of mice very susceptible to breast cancer. He put one group on a diet low in fat their entire lives and with the other group he switched them from a high fat diet to a healthier low fat one at different times; some before puberty, some at puberty and some after puberty. The study showed the same thing we see in human studies; those mice fed the high fat diet early in life had more cancer and more of the cancer spread to the lung, and the earlier the change to the healthier lower fat diet the better the mice fared.

The things we are exposed to earlier in life are crucial to our later health. If a nuclear power plant exploded nearby, dousing us all in heavy radiation, it would not cause a significant increase in cancer occurrence for at least 30 years. For example, the excess risk for breast, prostate and colon cancer among atomic bomb survivors in Hiroshima and Nagasaki continues to be observed today, and persists throughout the lifetime of the survivors. The largest grouping of the radiation-related cancer deaths for these common cancers occurred in the period from 1986 to 1990, forty to forty five years after exposure.4

Recent studies have also found fruit eating during childhood had powerful effects to protect against cancer in later life. A 60-year study of 4,999 participants found those who consumed more fruit in their childhood (highest quartile) were 38 percent less likely to develop cancer of all types as adults.5 There is much more here and the science is fascinating. I could go on and on with hundreds of more studies, telling this story, of food and other factors initiating cancer, but the point is—we already know enough about how to beat breast cancer. We can implement good science to win the war on cancer. We can do it now. We must eat right America.

For adults at risk or who already have cancer, nutritional excellence is a critical intervention one can use to reduce risk and significantly increase the chance of survival.

Eat a high-nutrient, vegetable-based diet as described in my books, Eat To Live and Eat For Health. Green vegetables are the most powerful anti-breast cancer food. Take note that a vegetarian diet does not show protection against breast cancer as much as a diet rich in green vegetables, berries, and seeds. It is the phytochemical nutrient density and diversity of the diet that offers the most dramatic protection against cancer, not merely the avoidance of meat or fat.

Continue Reading

Nikki Benoit, Outreach Coordinator for Florida Voices for Animals, had the opportunity to talk with Senator Barack Obama about U.S. agriculture and diet. Here’s a bit of their dialogue via Vegan.com. Take a look:

I stated how the UN’s reporting that animal agriculture contributes more to greenhouse gas emissions than all of transportation. I mentioned that over 10 billion land animals are funneled through egregious conditions in factory farms and that it requires an obscene amount of water and resources to maintain them [70% of all our grain goes through them]. I reiterated that our health epidemic is only compounded by our environmental crises and resource depletion, and what, as the leader of the most amazing nation, would he do about this [again, this is all a blur...I believe the media picked this up, too - I hope it made more sense at the time.]

His response included an admission that our infrastructure needs fixing, and that subsidies need to be taken away from large scale animal ag, helping small family farms. He acknowledged that our health care crises needs to incorporate preventative measures, including more fresh vegetables and fruit. He also said schools need more of these items versus pre-packaged food and meat products. And of course, he pointed the finger at China and India and that their new diet [which is mimicking ours] needs to be changed.

Vegan.com is touting this as “Obama’s vegan movement.” I wouldn’t go that far, but it’s cool to hear a presidential nominee urging people to eat more plant foods and less animal products—anyone know McCain’s position on this?

In what some are calling a surprise move, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force now recommends not screening for prostate cancer in men age 75 years or older. Tara Parker-Pope of The New York Times reports:

Screening is typically performed with a blood test measuring prostate-specific antigen, or PSA, levels. Widespread PSA testing has led to high rates of detection. Last year, more than 218,000 men learned they had the disease.

Yet various studies suggest the disease is “overdiagnosed” — that is, detected at a point when the disease most likely would not affect life expectancy — in 29 percent to 44 percent of cases. Prostate cancer often progresses very slowly, and a large number of these cancers discovered through screening will probably never cause symptoms during the patient’s lifetime, particularly for men in their 70s and 80s. At the same time, aggressive treatment of prostate cancer can greatly reduce a patient’s quality of life, resulting in complications like impotency and incontinence.

Past task force guidelines noted there was no benefit to prostate cancer screening in men with less than 10 years left to live. Since it can be difficult to assess life expectancy, it was an informal recommendation that had limited impact on screening practices. The new guidelines take a more definitive stand, however, stating that the age of 75 is clearly the point at which screening is no longer appropriate.

In our bilk-the-patient system of modern medicine, nixing this money-maker will certainly hit doctors and hospitals in the bottom-line. Now, there’s more you can do—eat your way to a healthy prostate. Dr. Fuhrman explains:

Eat a variety of colorful fruits and vegetables, rich not only in lycopene but in thousands of other protective compounds. Each year, researchers find another carotenoid that has powerful beneficial effects and reduces cancer. Spinach was this year’s recipient of the anti-prostate cancer award, with researchers in Japan finding neoxanthin compounds (a class of carotenoids) that powerfully inhibit prostate cancer. In the past, pink grapefruit, watermelon, cooked tomatoes, pomegranate, cruciferous vegetables, red peppers, berries, figs, and many other foods all have been shown to inhibit the development of prostate cancer…

…Fresh fruits are an important component of the natural diet of all primates. Humans and other primates have color vision and the ability to appreciate sweets. We are designed this way so that we can recognize ripe fruits and be attracted to them. We have a natural sweet tooth designed to direct us to those foods most critical for our survival, but sugar and candy manufacturers also know that bright colors and sweet tastes are instinctually attractive. They have used that knowledge to their advantage. Remember, your instinctual reaction is designed to lead you to fruit—not sugary, processed foods. Fruit is an indispensable requirement to maintain a high level of health. Fruit consumption has been shown to offer the strongest protection against certain cancers, especially oral, esophageal, lung, prostate, and pancreatic cancer1…

…Over the last few years, the health benefits of seeds also have become more apparent. A tablespoon of ground flaxseed, hempseeds, chia seeds, or other seeds can supply those hard-to find omega-3 fats that protect against diabetes, heart disease, and cancer.2 Seeds are also rich in lignans, a type of fiber associated with a reduced risk of both breast cancer and prostate cancer. In addition, seeds are a good source of iron, zinc, calcium, protein, potassium, magnesium, Vitamin E, and folate. The plant goes to great effort in producing and protecting its seed, filling each genetic package with high concentrations of vitamins, minerals, proteins, essential oils, and enzymes.

Okay guys, think about it. What would you rather do? Eat your fruits and veggies or get stuck with a needle in a place where no needle should ever be—eek!

Continue Reading

• Research by Dr. Ron Shaoul, from Bnai Zion Medical Center in Haifa, Israel claims even infants face overweight problems—in the journal Pediatrics. Reuters reports:

The infants were considered overweight if they had a body mass index (BMI) above the 85th weight-for-height percentile on 2 or more measurements taken at least 3 months part. This means that 85 percent of children their age and gender have a lower BMI, which is a measure of weight in relation to height.

In the first study, the researchers found that infants between the 85th and 94th weight-for-height percentiles actually had fewer hospital admissions and repeat admissions than normal-weight infants. However, higher than expected admission rates were seen in the most overweight infants (95th or higher percentile).

In the second study, overweight infants were more likely than their normal-weight peers to have developmental delays and snoring. There was also evidence that asthma and other breathing problems were more common in overweight infants.

• I don’t buy this, but Dr. Antigone Oreopoulos from University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada, suggests obesity may protect against heart disease—via the American Heart Journal. Reuters explains:

According to the researchers, patients who were overweight or obese were less likely to die during follow up compared to their normal-weight peers. Being overweight or obese "remained protective" against death in a "risk-adjusted" analysis.

Heart failure patients who had a normal weight or who were underweight had the highest death rates. "It remains unknown, however, if higher body fat levels are actually the cause of better outcomes in patients with heart failure," the researchers note in the American Heart Journal.

"We believe there is a need for prospective studies to confirm these findings and elucidate potential mechanisms" for the potentially protective effect of increased body weight on heart failure, Oreopoulos and colleagues conclude.

• A new study by Casey Family Programs in Seattle, Washington has determined that babysitting prior to kindergarten may promote obesity—another from Pediatrics. Reuters is on it:

The study, conducted by Dr. Erin J. Maher, from Casey Family Programs in Seattle, and colleagues, involved nearly 16,000 first-time kindergartners who had or had not been enrolled in childcare, defined as spending at least 10 hours per week in care not provided by a parent.

Childcare was subdivided into four types: 1) paid or unpaid care by a relative, friend, or neighbor, held at least occasionally at the child's home; 2) paid care by a non-relative family outside the child's home; 3) Head Start; and 4) care at daycare center, nursery school, preschool, or pre-kindergarten. Children were considered to be obese if their weight was in the 95th or higher percentile for height.

Overall, kids in childcare were more likely to obese than children not in childcare. Of the various childcare types, care by a relative, friend, or neighbor was most strongly linked to obesity. Compared with other racial groups, white children were less likely and Latino children more likely to be obese.

Whoa! This is hardcore, the Spartan 300 Challenge. Via CrossFit:

Yup, I’m thinking about trying it!

• People blame China’s booming economy for increased greenhouse gas emissions, but those countries importing from China are equally to blame. Catherine Brahic of NewScientist explains:

Economists now say that one-third of China's carbon dioxide emissions are pumped into the atmosphere in order to manufacture exported goods – many of them "advanced" electronics goods destined for developed countries.

"Export goods emissions" account for 1.7 billion tonnes of China's carbon dioxide. That represents 6% of total global emissions – the equivalent of Germany, France and the UK's combined emissions.

Discussing the scale of China's emissions has been a hot topic since it was forecast that they could surpass US emissions as the world's leader in 2007. Some say that has now happened.

A large share of these emissions – up to 25% – has been blamed on China's ever-growing export market, but this has not been quantified until now.

• Somehow amid staggering gas prices oil companies are enjoying record profits, and, they’ll continue to receive tax breaks, royalty relief, and subsidies. ENN reports:

Tax breaks for the oil and gas industry included in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 increase from around $1.3 billion in 2000 to some $3.6 billion in 2008, and they’re set to grow further, to some $3.8 billion by 2010, according to the Joint Committee on "Taxation Estimates of Federal Tax Expenditures for Fiscal Years 2007-2011," FoE points out in its analysis (pdf). The list of oil and gas industry tax breaks is a long one. At an estimated cost of $5.9 billion over five years, the oil and gas depletion allowance allows oil companies to deduct 15% of their sales revenues to reflect the declining value of their investment. The problem is that the accounting methodology does not accurately reflect companies’ assets actual loss in value over time, and they often wind up deducting more than the value of their original investment, according to the report’s authors. Congress has passed H.R. 4520, the "American Jobs Creation Act of 2004," which included provisions added that changed the classification of oil and natural gas production to that of a manufactured good.

"This enabled them to claim billions of dollars in new tax deductions, effectively lowering their tax rate," according to the report.

Initial estimates by the Joint Committee on Taxation estimated that it would cost the federal government some $3.5 billion over the next five years. On the other hand, efforts to change this, as was included in "The Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act of 2008," could raise more than $5.1 billion in revenue. Deductions for intangible drilling costs — cost of wages, supplies and site preparation, royalty payments, foreign royalty, and income tax payments will add another $6.5 billion to the lost government revenue total over the next five years.

• The average American households waste $500 a year on spoiled fruits and vegetables. The Associated Press reports:

One reason for the rampant waste is that many people aren't sure how long they can safely keep fruits and vegetables. If your fruit has gone bad, however, you'll generally know -- if not from telltale dark spots, then by smelling or squeezing it.

Knowing how to pick and store your produce can help extend shelf life so it doesn't get to the point where you have to throw it out. The best methods vary depending on the fruit or vegetable, but a few rules of thumb generally apply across the board.

The first step is to immediately inspect your goods once you get home and pluck out any spoiled specimens.

"It really is true that one bad apple can make the entire bunch go bad," said James Parker, who's in charge of buying produce for Whole Foods Markets.

That's especially true for soft fruits such as peaches and nectarines. And the higher the sugar content, the more likely a fruit is to spoil faster.

Just a reminder, DiseaseProof is having its first offline meeting, Saturday, August 23rd at Sacred Chow in New York City.

You remember Sacred Chow. It’s an Eating to Live on the Outside favorite—making it the perfect place to hang out!

If you’ll be in NYC on the 23rd come chill with me! Now, I haven’t worked out a time yet or if the day will include other activities, but I’ll keep you posted.

This won’t be an official Dr. Fuhrman event, just a casual meet and greet. If you’re interested, send an email to diseaseproof@gmail.com. A bunch of people have already signed up!

Continue Reading

Eat the View, a movement to plant healthy, edible landscapes in high-impact, high visibility places, wants the White House to plant an organic food garden. Via Bethany Sanders of That’sFit:

We planted our first vegetable garden this past spring and enjoyed it so much that we just spent the weekend doubling its size for next year. With a very small financial investment and a little bit of physical labor, we've been able to contribute fresh, healthy, organic foods to our menu and teach our kids some lessons about food production as well.

Rising food costs, food safety concerns, and an increased awareness about environmental issues have lead to an increase in backyard gardening. And some food activists are hoping to encourage that trend by putting an organic garden on one of the most well-known lawns in Amercia ... The White House.

Sounds like a great idea, the ultimate lead by example! The White House used to farm in the past. Check out this photo on EatTheView.org:

Although I imagine the scarecrow would be equipped with spy cameras, machine guns, and night vision.

Merck marketed Gardasil as a wonder drug, but more and more articles are blasting the HPV vaccine, like this one by Medscape’s Allison Gandey. She reports on Gardasil’s foreboding side effects. Take a look:

According to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), as of June 30, 2008, more than 9700 adverse events have been reported since the vaccine was approved 2 years ago. Of these, 94% were classified as nonserious events and 6% as severe.

Serious Adverse Events

• Nervous system disorders, such as Guillain-Barré syndrome and headache
• Thromboembolic events
• Musculoskeletal and connective tissue problems
• Lymphatic system disorders
• Gastrointestinal problems
• General disorders and administration site conditions
• Immune system problems, including hypersensitivity reactions, bronchospasm, and urticaria

Most Commonly Reported Events

• Fainting
• Pain at the injection site
• Headache
• Nausea
• Fever

Again, this is a tough pill to swallow. For starters, adverse reactions to Gardasil have been shown to kill and—we’ve talked about it numerous times—Gardasil is only effective against 4 of the 100 strains of HPV. Quite the risk for what, 4% protection!

You don’t read a lot of lupus. I guess its one of those diseases that lacks a colored ribbon and a celebrity spokes person, but for many people lupus is a life-altering condition. More from Judy Fortin of CNN:

Amy Harned, who lives in Webster, Massachusetts, is among the 1.5 million Americans who suffer from the autoimmune disorder. Lupus causes the body's immune system to attack its own tissues, causing inflammation and damage. When Harned's lupus was first diagnosed, she said she "was really terrified, but gradually I got more information." She realized with proper treatment she could lead a somewhat normal life…

"…The prognosis for lupus today is very good," Lisa Fitzgerald, a Boston, Massachusetts-based rheumatologist, said. "The survival rate is really over 90 percent in five to 10 years of having the disease. In the 1950s it was probably 50 percent."

Part of the reason for the improved success has to do with better treatment in managing the condition. Over-the-counter nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs such as aspirin, naproxen and ibuprofen offer relief to some patients.

Other lupus sufferers might be prescribed an antimalarial drug called hydroxychloroquine.

"It's a quinine derivative. It's quite safe," Fitzgerald said. "It can make a big difference for patients who have mild disease."

Fitzgerald added she also prescribes corticosteroids "to squelch flareups." While they work well, she cautioned they do have side effects.

Wow! A life time of prescribed drugs—now that sounds like modern medicine! But what if there was another way? A healthier way to live your life without lupus, Dr. Fuhrman talks about it:

For the last 20 years, multiple studies have been published in medical journals documenting the effectiveness of high vegetable diets on autoimmune illnesses.1 These have been largely ignored by the medical profession and most doctors still deny the effectiveness of nutrition on autoimmune and inflammatory conditions; a high-nutrient eating-style is most effective in aiding people suffering with these conditions.

And here’s a little more from Dr. Fuhrman:

An aggressive nutritional approach to autoimmune illnesses should always be tried first when the disease is in its infancy. Logically, the more advanced the disease is, and the more damage that has been done by the disease, the less likely the patient will respond. My experience with inflammatory diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis is that some patients are more dietary-sensitive than others and that some patients have very high levels of inflammation that are difficult to curtail with natural therapy. Nevertheless, the majority benefit—and since the conventional drugs used to treat these types of illnesses are so toxic and have so many risky side effects, the dietary method should be tried first.

You got to wonder, why something as simple and noninvasive as changing diet isn’t always tried first. Oh wait! It doesn’t make money.

Continue Reading

Okay, the handstand pushups were pretty brutal. So instead give these back extensions a try. Have a look:

I love doing back exercises and twists and all that stuff! Here’s one of my favorite Yoga poses, wheel pose. Via ABC-of-Yoga.com:

Yup, I can actually do it. Not perfect yet, but I’m getting there. Can any of you do it too?

The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) has determined that many fast food kids’ meals contain enough calories of an entire day. Nanci Hellmich of USA TODAY reports:

Overall, the findings reveal that 93% of the kids' meals at McDonald's and Wendy's contain more than 430 calories, the average number of calories that children ages 4 to 8 should get at a single meal. The comparable numbers are 92% at Burger King; 89% at Dairy Queen; 69% at Arby's; 60% at Denny's. The latter's kids' meals don't include drinks.

On the healthful side, about 67% of the kids' meals at Subway have fewer than 430 calories.

"When you go to most chain restaurants, ordering off the kids' menu is a nightmare," says Margo Wootan, nutrition policy director for the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) and the mother of a 10-year-old daughter.

"Right now kids' meals are almost all unhealthy meals when they should be almost all healthy meals," she says "At the very least, restaurants should list calories on the menu so that parents can navigate through this minefield of calories and fat to find the healthy options."

Let that be a lesson to you if you actually believe fast food giants are concerned about kids’ dietary needs. For more, here’s the CSPI analysis: Obesity on the Kids’ Menus at Top Chains.

• Some environmentalists claim we have 100 months to fix climate change or else we face a tipping point. Via Karin Kloosterman of TreeHugger:

If we don’t, echo scientists, life on this planet will change as we know it. With the emerging economy of China, the eastern superpower is now producing more greenhouse gases than America.

For every coal plant America shuts down, China opens 20 more. In light of some of our imminent problems, Andrew Simms from the New Economics Foundation wrote an eye-opening opinion piece on the Guardian on the New Green Deal, a UK plan-of-action released last month to counteract climate change.

Simms, the policy director and head of the climate change program at the New Economics Foundation (NEF) –– a “think and do tank” –– says it’s now time to scream “FIRE!” We have 100 months (about 8 years) he warns to make radical changes to curb greenhouse gas emissions.

• A group of conservationists are suing the Environmental Protection Agency for failure to address pollution from ocean-going ships and aircraft. ENN reports:

Eight state and local jurisdictions filed similar notices today, formally declaring their intent to sue the EPA for unreasonable delay. The filers included the states of California, Connecticut, New Jersey, Oregon, the City of New York, the South Coast Air Quality Management District, California Air Resources Board and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection.

The coalition filed petitions to the EPA in October and December 2007, requesting that it determine whether greenhouse gas emissions from marine vessels and aircraft endanger public health and welfare, and if so, to issue regulations to control greenhouse gas emissions from these sources. The coalition asked for a response within 180 days but none was received during that period.

• Scientists believe global-warming and over-fishing are responsible for booming jellyfish populations and stings. More from Elisabeth Rosenthal of the International Herald Tribune:

The explosion of jellyfish populations, scientists say, reflects a combination of severe overfishing of natural predators, like tuna, sharks and swordfish; rising sea temperatures caused in part by global warming; and pollution that has depleted oxygen levels in coastal shallows.

These problems are pronounced in the Mediterranean, a sea bounded by more than a dozen countries that rely on it for business and pleasure. Left unchecked in the Mediterranean and elsewhere, these problems could make the swarms of jellyfish menacing coastlines a grim vision of seas to come.

"The problem on the beach is a social problem," said Dr. Gili, who talks with admiration of the "beauty" of the globular jellyfish. "We need to take care of it for our tourism industry. But the big problem is not on the beach. It's what's happening in the seas."

Apparently Gummi Bears—a CANDY—protect our teeth. Gummi Bears are made with the artificial sweetener xylitol; an ingredient that some claim reduces plaque bacteria. This brainstorm comes to us via the journal BMC Oral Health. Rebecca Smith of The Telegraph reports:

The results are published in the journal BMC Oral Health and show significant reductions on plaque causing bacteria amongst children eating both types of bears.

Lead author Kiet A. Ly, from the University of Washington, said: "For xylitol to be successfully used in oral health promotion programmes amongst primary-school children, an effective means of delivering xylitol must be identified. Gummy bears would seem to be more ideal than chewing gum."

The researchers concluded: "These results suggest that a xylitol gummy bear snack may be an alternative to xylitol chewing gum for dental caries prevention.

"A larger clinical trial is needed to confirm the xylitol results."

The researchers were surprised that both the xylitol group and the mannitol group showed reductions in plaque bacteria. Xylitol has been shown in previous research to be effective in helping to prevent tooth decay but evidence on mannitol, which is a very similar substance, has been conflicting.

Okay, Gummi Bears might be cute, but I’m not chewing some artificially flavored candy concoction to protect my teeth. Hopefully parents don’t buy into this jibber-jabber either—sheesh!