|
Thursday, May 23, 2013
Repeal The Monsanto Protection Act NOW!
Aspartame Linked To Leukemia and Lymphoma!
Aspartame Linked to Leukemia & Lymphoma in Groundbreaking Study
Each year, Americans consume about 5,250 tons of aspartame in total. 86 percent of this aspartame (4,500 tons) is from the consumption of diet sodas. Diet soda is the largest dietary source of aspartame in the U.S. A study recently published at the beginning of December 2012 links the consumption of Aspartame to increased risk of Lymphoma and Leukemia. The study was conducted by the Channing Division of Network Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA and Nutrition, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA. The study was a follow up after a 22 year period of data collection including frequent dietary and health check ups of the study group.
We have covered the subject of aspartame on several occasions that included findings that deomstrate how aspartame damages the brain. This new study suggests that as little as a single 355ml can of diet soda daily greatly increases the risk for cancers in men and women. It can also increase the risk of multiple myeloma and non-Hodgkin lymphoma in men. The results of this study forces us to really look at the effects of aspartame as there has never been a more comprehensive, long term study ever done on the topic. It is important to note that this can also reveal many more serious diseases and illnesses as data is observed even further.
The Most Comprehensive Study to Date on Aspartame
This study tracks over two million person-years giving it a huge pile of data to generate results from. Researchers prospectively analyzed data from the Nurses’ Health Study and the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study for a 22-year period. A total of 77,218 women and 47,810 men were included in the analysis, for a total of 2,278,396 person-years of data. It is not just the sample size of this study that makes it impressive, it is also the thoroughness with which aspartame intake was assessed in comparison to previous studies. Over the course of the study, every two years participants were given a detailed dietary questionnaire, and their diets were reassessed every four years. Shockingly, previous studies done on aspartame who revealed no link between aspartame and cancer in humans, only assessed participants’ aspartame intake at one point in time. This poses a major weakness in the accuracy of previous studies.
The combined results of this new study showed that just one 12-fl oz. can (355 ml) of diet soda daily leads to:
- 42 percent higher leukemia risk in men and women (pooled analysis)
- 102 percent higher multiple myeloma risk (in men only)
- 31 percent higher non-Hodgkin lymphoma risk (in men only)
- 102 percent higher multiple myeloma risk (in men only)
- 31 percent higher non-Hodgkin lymphoma risk (in men only)
This is a powerful set of results as it leaves little to ponder about when it comes to the long time talked about risks of aspartame on our health. The results were based on multi-variable relative risk models, all in comparison to participants who drank no diet soda. It is important to note that it still remains unknown why only men drinking higher amounts of diet soda showed increased risk for multiple myeloma and non-Hodgkin lymphoma, but the continuation of this study may reveal these results later.
Most of the past studies showing no link between aspartame and cancer have been criticized for being too short in duration and too inaccurate in assessing long-term aspartame intake. This new study solves both of those issues. The study in fact shows a positive link to cancer and it should come as no surprise given that a previous best-in-class research study done on animals (900 rats over their entire natural lifetimes) showed strikingly similar results back in 2006. More worrying is the follow up mega-study, which started aspartame exposure of the rats at the fetal stage. Increased lymphoma and leukemia risks were confirmed, and this time the female rats also showed significantly increased breast (mammary) cancer rates. This raises a critical question: will future, high-quality studies uncover links to the other cancers or diseases in which aspartame has been implicated?
My Own Thoughts
I have been researching aspartame and other health related ilnesses for a few years now and have found a lot of different information as it relates to effects of various substances on health. This study stands out from many as it illustrates the importance of conducting research that is of quality and done over time. While we cannot confirm with 100% accuracy that this was the key factor in these ilnesses, we can confirm that it does play a big role. Also, when we look at what exists today as studies that are in favor of Aspartame being safe, we find that there are many weaknesses behind them that would produce poor results in accuracy.
I have been researching aspartame and other health related ilnesses for a few years now and have found a lot of different information as it relates to effects of various substances on health. This study stands out from many as it illustrates the importance of conducting research that is of quality and done over time. While we cannot confirm with 100% accuracy that this was the key factor in these ilnesses, we can confirm that it does play a big role. Also, when we look at what exists today as studies that are in favor of Aspartame being safe, we find that there are many weaknesses behind them that would produce poor results in accuracy.
Of course we can always go back to what feels natural and what would make sense when we look at our foods and I think this is something that we dont require a scientific analysis to observe. Of course this is my opinion but, when we are adding chemicals that are synthetic and created in a lab to our food, it does not reflect naturally occurring elements that we are designed to consume. The human body was not designed to take in these types of substances through nature, which makes perfect sense as to why the majority of chemicals found in foods today have numerous links to serious health affects. This isn’t to say the body can’t handle all synthetics, but instead just shows that we should not be surprised to find out results like this.
If previous research on the subject was not enough, there is now undeniable evidence that suggests we should not be consuming aspartame at all in our diet. Switching over to sugar sweetened soda is also not a good alternative as this study also found that men consuming one or more sugar-sweetened sodas daily saw a 66 percent increase in non-Hodgkin lymphoma. It has become clear that having no soda at all in our diet is the ideal way to go. This would not only remove the aspartame and sugar risks, but it will also help in keeping your body in a more alkaline state.
Sources:
The Health Benefits of Drinking Young Coconut Milk!
-----
There is nothing more pleasant like having a glass of fresh coconut milk from a young coconut. Available at more places than ever, you can find these little young coconuts at Asian markets or Whole Foods Market.
Try a velvety smoothie made with just the flesh and water of a young coconut, scraped out of the shell and blended in the VitaMix blender or NutriBullet. You will feel a pure bliss from this heavenly nectar.
---
Benefits of Coconut Milk:
----
1. Helps to reduce toxic blood sugar places:
Glucose intolerance may cause manganese deficiency in your body. Coconut milk is a rich source of manganese. Whole grains, legumes and nuts are some other excellent sources of manganese.
---
2. Keeps skin and blood vessels flexible and elastic:
Copper is a very important mineral for most of the bodily functions. Copper and vitamin C help to maintain the flexibility and elasticity of the skin and blood vessels.
---
3. Aids in building strong bones:
Coconut milk is not rich in calcium, but it is rich in phosphorus. Phosphorus is an essential nutrient that the body needs for strengthening bones. It is must to take phosphorus with calcium particularly to prevent bone loss because it supplies phosphate to the body.
---
4. Helps to prevent anemia:
Lack of iron is the most common nutrient deficiency among the people throughout the world. Iron deficiency in body does not allow the body to develop enough hemoglobin for keeping sufficient oxygen levels in red blood cells, resulting in anemia. Each cup of coconut milk supplies the body with nearly a quarter of daily value of iron.
---
5. Relaxes muscles and nerves:
Whenever you feel muscle cramps or muscle soreness caused by excess acidity, have some food along with coconut milk. It is rich in magnesium and can help you in relieving the problem caused by tissue acidoisis. One of the functions of magnesium is it acts as a gate block in many nerve cells. If magnesium is not present in body, nerve cells become very active because of calcium that activates nerves. Excess contraction of muscles is caused by over-active nerve cells saturated in dietary and/or metabolic acids.
---
6. Helps in Controlling Weight:
This can be good news for people who are trying to reduce weight. Coconut milk makes you feel full very quickly because of high concentrations of dietary fiber.
---
7. Decreases the risk of joint inflammation:
Selenium is an important antioxidant. It controls the free radicals and thereby helps in relieving the symptoms of arthritis. It is observed that people with low levels of selenium may suffer from rheumatoid arthritis.
---
8. Helps in lowering high blood pressure:
People who are concerned about their blood pressure will not face any problem consuming foods containing potassium. Potassium is an alkaline mineral that helps in lowering blood pressure levels in the body by keeping the delicate alkaline pH of the body fluids at 7.365.
---
9. Helps in maintaining healthy immune system:
Coconut milk helps in warding off the aicds that result in colds and coughs by keeping the immune system healthy. It supplies vitamin C to the body which helps in circulation of the lymph and blood and the removal of dietary and metabolic acids..
---
10. Promotes the health of prostate gland:
Zinc plays a vital role in promoting the health of the prostate gland. A preliminary study showed that it buffers acids that cause cancerous cells.
---
Wednesday, May 22, 2013
Monday, May 20, 2013
Does A Low-Sodium Diet Increase Your Risk For Heart Attack or Stroke?
Some have suggested that since salt intakes are related to blood pressure, and since cardiovascular risks are also related to blood pressure, that, surely, salt intake levels are related to cardiovascular risk. This is the “salt hypothesis” or “sodium hypothesis.” Data are needed to confirm or reject hypotheses.
Blood pressure is a sign. When it goes up (or down) it indicates an underlying health concern. Changes result from many variables, often still poorly-understood. High blood pressure is treated with pharmaceuticals and with lifestyle interventions such as diet and exercise. The anti-hypertensive drugs are all approved by regulatory authorities such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. To be approved, these drugs must prove they work to lower blood pressure. Whether they also work to lower the incidence of heart attacks and strokes has not been the test to gain approval (it would take too long to develop new drugs), but the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute has invested heavily in such “health outcomes” studies.
The ALLHAT study was funded by the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI) to compare the health outcomes of four classes of anti-hypertensive drugs, all of which had demonstrated their ability to reduce blood pressure in relative safety. The idea is that blood pressure is only a "surrogate outcome,and we should be more concerned with clinically meaningful endpoints. Dr. Jeffrey R. Cutler, who supervised the study for the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI) explained its importance: "Trials are based on the notion that different antihypertensive regimes, despite similar efficacy in lowering blood pressure, have other beneficial or harmful effects that modify their net effect on cardiovascular or all-cause morbidity and mortality."
Lifestyle interventions are "antihypertensive regimes" too. For years, the same situation prompting the ALLHAT trial applied to lifestyle interventions designed to improve blood pressure -- they were untested regarding health outcomes. Certain dietary and lifestyle interventions reduced blood pressure, at least in sensitive sub-populations. Whether they also reduced the incidence of heart attacks and strokes had never been tested. Thus, until the 1990s, scientists had never tested the “salt hypothesis” by documenting whether reducing dietary salt actually reduces a person’s chances of having a heart attack or a stroke. As in the drug “health outcomes” trials, this is now changing. The results have vast public health policy implications. We should not be recommending that everyone change their diets without evidence of some overall health benefit.
Even documenting an association of, for example, low-sodium diets with reduced incidence of heart attacks would only be the first step. Association is not the same as causation. Nevertheless, unless an association is established, we have no reason to think that a causal link is possible. Of the first seventeen “health outcomes” studies of sodium reduction, four have found an association in the general population between low-sodium diets and reduced incidence of cardiovascular events like stroke or heart attack (and two of those were in exceptionally high salt-consuming societies). The medical literature does not show a health benefit from reduced-salt diets. Here’s what scientists have found (citations):
1985. A ten-year study of nearly 8,000 Hawaiian Japanese men concluded: "No relation was found between salt intake and the incidence of stroke."
1995. An eight-year study of a New York City hypertensive population stratified for sodium intake levels found those on low-salt diets had more than four times as many heart attacks as those on normal-sodium diets – the exact opposite of what the “salt hypothesis” would have predicted.
1997. An analysis by NHLBI’s Dr. Cutler of the first six years’ data from the MRFIT database documented no health outcomes benefits of lower-sodium diets.
1997. A ten-year follow-up study to the huge Scottish Heart Health Study found no improved health outcomes for those on low-salt diets.
1998. An analysis of the health outcomes over twenty years from those in the massive US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES I) documented a 20% greater incidence of heart attacks among those on low-salt diets compared to normal-salt diets
1998. A health outcomes study in Finland, reported to the American Heart Association that no health benefits could be identified and concluded “…our results do not support the recommendations for entire populations to reduce dietary sodium intake to prevent coronary heart disease.”
1999. A further analysis of the MRFIT database, this time using fourteen years’ data, confirmed no improved health benefit from low-sodium diets. Its author conceded that there is "no relationship observed between dietary sodium and mortality."
1999. A study of Americans found that less sodium-dense diets did reduce the cardiovascular mortality of one population sub-set, overweight men – the article reporting the findings did not explain why this obese group actually consumed less sodium than normal-weight individuals in the study.
2001. A Finnish study reported an increase in cardiovascular events for obese men (but not women or normal-weight individuals of either gender) – the article, however, failed to adjust for potassium intake levels which many researchers consider a key associated variable.
2002. In September, 2002, the prestigious Cochrane Collaboration produced the latest and highest-quality meta-analysis of clinical trials. It was published in the British Medical Journal and confirmed earlier meta-analyses' conclusions that significant salt reduction would lead to very small blood pressure changes in sensitive populations and no health benefits.
2003. In June 2003, Dutch researchers using a massive database in Rotterdam concluded that "variations in dietary sodium and potassium within the range commonly observed in Westernized societies have no material effect on the occurrence of cardiovascular events and mortality at old age."
2004. In July 2004, the first "outcomes" study identifying a population risk appeared in Stroke magazine. Researchers found that in a Japanese population, "low" sodium intakes (about 20% above Americans' average intake) had one-third the incidence of fatal strokes of those consuming twice as much sodium as Americans.
2006. A March 2006 analysis of the federal NHANES II database in The American Journal of Medicine found a 37% higher cardiovascular mortality rate for low-sodium dieters
2007. A February 2007 reported in the International Journal of Epidemiology studied 40,547 Japanese over seven years and found "the Japanese dietary pattern was associated with a decreased risk of CVD mortality, despite its relation to sodium intake and hypertension."
2007. An April 2007 article in the British Medical Journal found a 25% lower risk of CV events in a group which years earlier had achieved significant sodium reduction during two clinical trials (TOHP I and TOHP II).
2007. An October 2007 analysis of a large Dutch database published in the European Journal of Epidemiology documented no benefit of low-salt diets in reducing stroke or heart attack incidence nor lowering death rates.
2008. A May 2008 examination of NHANES II (the largest US federal database of nutrition and health) published in the Journal of General Internal Medicine confirmed two earlier studies of earlier NHANES surveys that there is no health benefit (CVD or all-cause mortality) for those on low-sodium diets.
From my own research I have found an association between low sodium diets and increased tissue and organ acidity. Since sodium or salt is necessary in the production of sodium bicarbonate to manage dietary and/or metabolic acid a low sodium diet would increase risk of latent tissue acidosis and cononary vascular disease.
Do low-salt diets improve health outcomes? The evidence
Do low-salt diets improve health outcomes? The evidence
There have been relatively few studies of the fundamental question of whether reducing an individual's -- or a population's -- salt intake will improve their health outcomes. Usually only one risk factor is considered: blood pressure. Other impacts confound blood pressure, itself a rather herterogeneous response. None of the outcomes studies is a controlled trial. Thus, policies embracing universal salt (or sodium) reduction have a weak foundation in the medical literature.
Here are the health outcomes studies reported publicly with links to the original sources where available:
Here are the health outcomes studies reported publicly with links to the original sources where available:
Cutler, J.R., Presented May 30, 1997, at American Society of Hypertension annual meeting, San Francisco, CA. (unpublished).
Tunsall-Pedoe. “Comparison by prediction of 27 factors of coronary heart disease and health in men and women of the Scottish heart health study cohort study. British Medical Journal, 1997; 315:722-729. See Table 6, age-adjusted hazard ratios.
Valkonen, V-P. “Sodium and potassium excretion and the risk of acute myocardial infarction” Presented October 15, 1998 to the American Heart Association Scientific Sessions, Dallas, TX (unpublished).
Cohen, J.D. presentation to NHLBI Workshop on Sodium and Blood Pressure, January 28, 1999, Bethesda, MD
Tuomilehto J. et al. “Urinary sodium excretion and cardiovascular mortality in Finland: a prospective study.” Lancet 2001; 357:848-51. Commentary Letters (requires free registration)
Grobbee, D.E. et al. "Sodium and potasium intake and risk of cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality: the Rotterdam Study" presented to the 13th European Meeting on Hypertension in Milan, Italy, June 13-17, 2003 (published abstract)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)