Jun
26
2021

Being A Morning Person Can Prevent Depression

A British study concluded that being a morning person can prevent depression. It was reviewed also in CNN. The study used sleep data from 85,000 UK participants in the Great Britain Biobank Study. They wore wrist activity monitors that provided sleep data. Researchers compared the sleep data with the self-reported mood changes. They found that if the sleep pattern is misaligned with the circadian rhythm, those who are night owls are at a higher risk of developing mood disorders. The controls were those who were morning persons. They were not affected by the misalignment effect.

Normal sleep pattern

Natural sleep habit or the circadian rhythm starts between 10 PM and 11 PM and continues for 7 to 8 hours. Your hormones are replenished during your sleep. This helps your body’s hormones and the immune system to restore itself overnight.

“The health problems associated with being a night owl are likely a result of being a night owl living in a morning person’s world, which leads to disruption in their body’s circadian rhythms”. This is what sleep specialist Kristen Knutson said. She is an associate professor of neurology and preventive medicine at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine.

Reclaim your natural sleep habit

The key is to learn to live within your circadian rhythm pattern. Caffeine is a powerful stimulant and will stop you from falling asleep. For this reason, it is best to avoid caffeine-containing beverages. If you cannot live without your favourite cup of java, switch to the decaffeinated version. Stop using LED lights (from TV, computers, tablets or smartphones) 2 hours prior to your bedtime. Use dark curtains and enjoy a comfortable bed. Maybe read that thriller, earlier in the day instead of making it your bedtime story. And do yourself a favour: you do not need the eleven o’clock news on TV!  They will probably stop you from falling asleep. Go to sleep between 10PM and 11PM.

Children can have problems with sleep disturbances and depression

Another study published March 22, 2021 in the Jama Network showed that depression had an association with sleep disturbances in youth and children.

A meta-analysis of 16 publications looked at depression and disturbed sleep. It showed that depression was 1.5-fold higher in sleep disturbed youths/children compared to controls with a normal sleep pattern.

Other studies re. being a morning person can prevent depression

Another study with Dr. Knutson as the lead author appeared in 2018. The authors found that various health conditions, mood disorders and mortality were on the increase the more the sleep rhythm deviated from the circadian rhythm. Morning persons were protected from this effect. But night shift workers and night owls were at a higher risk of disease. Specifically, they found the following associations for evening types.

  • Evening types compared to morning types had a 1.94-fold risk of psychological disorders
  • The risk of diabetes was 1.30-fold for evening types
  • Neurological disorders had a 1.25-fold risk in evening types
  • Gastrointestinal/abdominal disorders occurred 1.23-fold more often in evening types
  • respiratory disorders were 1.22-fold more common in evening types
  • Evening types had a 10% increased risk of all-cause mortality

The researchers concluded that externally imposed timing of work and social activities has potentially serious health consequences.

Circadian misalignment responsible for disease

Dr. Knutson also said: “Circadian misalignment could also lead to inadequate sleep duration and quality, which could also impair mood and exacerbate mood disorders.”

In other words, circadian misalignment to circadian rhythm problems. This can cause mood disturbances, but eventually lead to the diseases listed above.

Evidence of health risks in night shifts workers

The medical literature is full of examples that the health of night shift workers is significantly affected by circadian misalignment. Here are a few examples.

1.Here is a random selection to illustrate the health risks of night shifts workers. A study from 2015 examined the sleep patterns of 315 shift nurses and health care workers in Iranian teaching hospitals. They found that 83.2% suffered from poor sleep and half of them had moderate to excessive sleepiness when they were awake.

2.This South Korean study examined 244 male workers, aged 20 to 39 in a manufacturing plant. Researchers compared blood tests from daytime workers to blood tests from night shift workers. They also obtained inflammatory markers like the C-reactive protein and leukocyte counts. Night shift workers had significantly higher values. The investigators concluded that shift workers have increased inflammatory markers. This is a sign of a higher risk of developing cardiovascular disease in the future.

Higher mortality and higher cancer risk in nighttime workers

3. A Swedish study found that white-collar shift workers had a 2.6-fold higher mortality over a control group of daytime white-collar workers.

4. Another study compared night workers in the age group of 45 to 54 with daytime workers and found a 1.47-fold higher mortality rate in the night shift workers.

5.In a study from China 25,377 participants were part of a study that investigated cancer risk in males with more than 20 years of night shift work. They had a 2.03-fold increased risk to develop cancer compared to males working day shifts. Women with night shift work in this study showed no effect with regard to cancer development.

Healthy telomeres with healthy sleep pattern

It is true that you can suffer multiple health problems, as all of your hormones depend on the resetting during your deepest sleep between 2AM and 4AM triggered by the nighttime melatonin response. Even your telomeres, the caps of chromosomes in every cell get shortened from too much stress and too little sleep.

One example of such a study comes from Milan, Italy. https://oem.bmj.com/content/75/Suppl_2/A480.1

In this 2018 study researchers compared 46 nurses who had worked in night shifts with 51 nurses working day shifts. Among the night shift workers breast cancer was common, but not among day workers.

Shortened telomeres, hypomethylation of BRC1 gene and p53 gene

In the night shift nurses from Milan there was hypomethylation of the breast cancer gene BRC1. There was also hypomethylation of the general cancer gene p53. At the same time significant telomere shortening occurred in night shift nurses who had worked night shifts for more than 15 years. This likely all worked together in causing night nurses to develop breast cancer more frequently.

Shortened telomeres mean a shortened life span. The reason for this is that people with shortened telomeres develop heart attacks, strokes and cancer. This is what shortens the life span. How do we avoid this risk? Go back to healthy sleep habits. As mentioned above it is best to start going to sleep between 10PM and 11PM and sleep for 7 to 8 hours. Night owls delay going to sleep by 2 to 3 hours.

Being A Morning Person Can Prevent Depression

Being A Morning Person Can Prevent Depression (click image to enlarge)

Conclusion

A publication in Molecular Psychiatry demonstrated that evening person (night owls) are more likely to develop depression. This is in comparison to morning persons. As discussed, other researchers showed that evening persons also can develop diabetes and neurological disorders. In addition, respiratory disorders and gastrointestinal disorders are more common in night owls as well. When it comes to mortality, evening persons have a 10% increase of mortality over morning persons. There is a large body of literature regarding diseases of night shift workers. Night Shift work is perhaps the most extreme example of a circadian misalignment. It leads to poor sleep, inflammation in the body, increased cancer risk and higher mortality compared to day shift workers.

Prevent telomere shortening

Even the telomeres get shortened in night owls and night shift workers. We can prevent problems like these by going to bed in time and sleeping according to our circadian rhythm. If you had a poor night’s sleep, make up for it with the help of an afternoon nap. Do not sleep all afternoon though; half an hour or one hour will be enough. Even a short, restful nap after coming home from work can restore your feeling of wellness.

Feb
20
2021

Two Articles Showed that Fish Oil Reduces Cardiovascular Disease and Mortality

Recently two articles showed that fish oil reduces cardiovascular disease and mortality.

British study recording the effects of fish oil over 10 years

For one thing, the British Medical Journal published an article comparing people who supplemented with fish oil with people who did not. In this case, the ones who supplemented had a lower risk of mortality and had lower cardiovascular disease than the control group. In brief, 427,678 subjects were enrolled in this British study between 2006 and 2010. Questionnaires at the beginning of the study revealed how many capsules of fish oil the subjects consumed. Hospital records and death certificates provided information about cardiovascular disease mortality at the end of 2018. Altogether, 31% of the subjects said that they were taking fish oil supplements regularly.

In short, here are the results of the study showing what fish oil did.

  • 7% lower cardiovascular events
  • 16% lower risk of cardiovascular disease mortality
  • 20% lower mortality risk from heart attacks
  • 13% lower risk of death from any cause (when compared to people who did not use fish oil)

Discussion

Given these points, the authors stated that it was the omega-3 fatty acids in fish oil that caused all the beneficial effects. This included lowering of blood pressure, triglycerides and reducing the heart rate. Fish oil was also responsible for improvement of endothelial function, inflammation and blood clotting. In addition, fish oil protects against cardiac arrhythmias. They stated: “Fish oil supplementation could be an inexpensive, quick, safe way of increasing an individual’s omega-3 fatty acid intake”.

Mayo Clinic study of taking higher doses of omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids

A study dated Sept. 17, 2020 showed the cardiovascular benefits of higher doses of omega-3 fatty acids. This was the second of two articles that showed that fish oil reduces cardiovascular disease and mortality. It was published in Mayo Clinic Proceedings. This metaanalysis involved 40 interventional studies and 135,000 patients. Two types of omega-3 fatty acids, namely EPA and DHA were studied with regard to the prevention of cardiovascular disease. EPA and DHA supplementation had the following effects.

  • 35% reduction of risk of a fatal heart attack
  • 13% reduction of heart attacks in general
  • 10% reduced risk of coronary heart disease occurrence
  • 9% reduction of mortality from coronary heart disease

The researchers described that the higher the dose of omega-3 fatty acid supplementation, the greater the protection.

An extra dose of 1000 mg per day of EPA and DHA reduced the risk of cardiovascular disease as follows. There was a reduction of cardiovascular disease by 5.8% and of heart attacks by 9%. I take 1800 mg of EPA/DHA twice a day, a total of 3600 mg per day.

Two Articles Showed that Fish Oil Reduces Cardiovascular Disease and Mortality

Two Articles Showed that Fish Oil Reduces Cardiovascular Disease and Mortality

Conclusion

Two independent studies of fish oil or omega-3 fatty acids came to similar conclusions.  Heart attacks and strokes are significantly reduced. And mortality in the group that used fish oil supplementation was also significantly reduced. An extra dose of 1000 mg per day of EPA and DHA reduced the risk of cardiovascular disease as follows. There was a reduction of cardiovascular disease by 5.8% and of a heart attack by 9%. Based on these findings the researchers recommended that patients should use EPA/DHA supplementation to reduce cardiovascular risk. EPA/DHA supplementation lowers blood pressure, triglycerides and the heart rate. Fish oil was also responsible for improvement of endothelial function, also for the prevention of inflammation and blood clotting. In addition, fish oil protects against cardiac arrhythmias. The end result is that you live a healthier life.

Incoming search terms:

Jul
13
2019

Replace Red Meat And Processed Red Meat

new study has shown that you can save lives when you replace red meat and processed red meat. The replacement was with fish, poultry or protein from vegetables. The study appeared in the British Medical Journal on June 12, 2019. It involved 53,553 women nurses and 27,916 male doctors in the United States and ran from 1986 to 2010. Every 4 years comprehensive diet sheets were compiled on each of the participants. Death rates of all of the clinical trial participants were also recorded. The amount of red meat or processed red meat servings, which the participants consumed per day was recorded. One serving of red meat is 3.5 ounces or 100 grams.

Results of the BMJ study

People consuming ½ a serving (50 grams) of red meat more per day over 8 years, had an increased mortality. It was increased by 9% over the following 8 years. Similarly, people consuming ½ a serving (50 grams) of processed red meat over 8 years, were in trouble. They had an increased mortality of 13% over the next 8 years. The researchers also found that when people ate less red meat and processed red meat, things normalized. Their mortality returned to a normal rate. Also, when people replaced red meat with fish, poultry and vegetables, the mortality figures went down as well.

Red meat consumption in the literature

The researchers reviewed the literature regarding disease risk and mortality with meat consumption. In particular, the researcher had an interest in increased red meat consumption and consumption of processed red meat. Other investigators mentioned that there was an increased risk of type 2 diabetes, colorectal cancer and other cancers.  In addition, cardiovascular disease and increased overall mortality were up with meat consumption. The worst variety of processed foods are bacon, hot dogs, and sausages. Certain lung diseases like chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and heart heart failure are directly related to consumption of red meat or processed red meat products. Hypertension also has a link to red meat consumption. Components of red processed meats such as saturated fats, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, preservatives and sodium can cause colorectal cancer and at the same time cause cardiovascular disease.

More details about the study

There were 8426 deaths among the nurses branch of the study. 3138 nurses died from cancer, 1774 from cardiovascular disease, 939 from neurodegenerative diseases, 751 from respiratory diseases, and 1824 from other causes. In the same time period (24 years) there were 5593 deaths among the males of the Health Professionals follow-up study. 1754 died from cardiovascular disease, 1754 from cancer. There were 434 deaths from respiratory diseases, 375 from neurodegenerative diseases, and 1276 from other causes.

Red meat consumption in women has decreased by 31% in the past 24 years. Men have cut back their red meat consumption by 11% in the same time period.

One subgroup of patients decreased their red meat consumption and replaced it with a higher intake of nuts, poultry (without skin), fish, dairy, eggs, whole grains and vegetables over 8 years. They had a lower death rate than the controls over the next 10 years.

Discussion of the BMJ study

The authors mentioned that a Japanese study found no increased mortality among 51,683 Japanese men and women eating red meat, poultry, processed meat and liver. There were 20,466 men and 31,217 women, aged 40-79 years. The study lasted for almost 16 years. There were 2685 deaths due 537 ischemic heart diseases and 1209 strokes. The investigators had traced how much meat the participants ate. They did not find any change in mortality up to 100 grams per day of beef or other meat consumption. I will discuss this further below.

Hormones and antibiotics may be partially responsible for higher mortality in the US

Dr. Valter Longo, professor of biological sciences at the University of Southern California and director of the USC Longevity Institute was not part of the study. He commented: “The lower or lack of association between red meat intake and mortality in other countries or areas of the world indicates that red meat may contribute to mortality in the United States by providing a high protein content but also because it may contain other factors that contribute to damage.“ He also questioned certain agricultural practices where hormones and antibiotics are in use in the raising of beef cattle in the US. This is not the case in Japan or Europe. He went on to say: “The reduced mortality, when red meat is replaced with fish, is consistent with this possibility since they contain generally similar levels of proteins”.

Use of antibiotics in cattle farming

The accepted practice of using antibiotics not only for treating infections, but also for accelerating growth in beef cattle has far-reaching ramifications.  The problem is that use of antibiotics in milk cows produces milk with antibiotic residues. In beef cattle antibiotic residue are also in the meat of these cows.

The question arose whether or not the use of antibiotics in cattle would possibly cause resistance to antibiotics in humans. This publication examines this question. It comes to the conclusion that the probability of resistant strains of bacteria in humans as a result of the feeding of antibiotics to cows in the US would be small. However, there is another aspect that only recently has gained attention. It is the change of the gut biome in humans as a result of antibiotic residues from the standard agricultural practices of raising cattle.

Change of the human gut biome

Meat eaters have raised TMAO blood levels

The human gut flora can change for various reasons. But once it has changed, it often stays in an altered state. It is a permanent change in bowel flora that can cause chemical reactions in the gut with the consumption of beef and eggs. Beef contains carnitine, which can lead to the production of TMAO (trimethylamine N-oxide). Egg yolk contains choline, which also raises TMAO levels in the blood.

In the following study 113 healthy men and women consumed either a meat diet (beef), white meat diet or protein from non-meat sources. After one month the beef group had triple the amount of TMAO in their blood compared to the other two diets. Interestingly, when the diets were switched the TMAO levels normalized again in the former beefeaters when consuming white meat or protein from non-meat sources.

Changed gut flora causes raised TMAO levels

The use of antibiotics as growth promoters in the US beef industry is the standard practice for raising beef. But this has led to antibiotic residues that are detectable in the laboratory. When a person eats beef that is contaminated with antibiotic residues, the bowel flora loses its diversity of bacteria in the gut. This leads to an accumulation of other bacteria that produce TMAO in the presence of beef or egg yolk and can cause cardiovascular disease on the one hand and cancer on the other. This happens over time.

Discussion

The answer as to why US beef is causing colorectal cancer and cardiovascular disease is directly related to the practice of using antibiotics as growth promoters. The use of antibiotics in the beef industry leads to a change in the gut flora in humans consuming this meat. Bacteria that can produce TMAO are now having the upper hand. In the US people produce more TMAO in response to beef consumption as the study mentioned has shown. The Japanese study cited above showed no sign of cardiovascular mortality when people consumed up to 100 gram (one serving) of meat per day over 16 years.

Antibiotics as growth promoters outlawed in Japan and Europe

The reason is that in Japan, as well as in Europe the use of antibiotics as growth promoters are illegal. When humans consume meat in Japan or Europe the original gut flora stays intact with no production of TMAO. Incidentally, the same is true for organic grass-fed meat in the US, which has no antibiotic residues in it. Recently there was a publication from Denmark that suggested to replace some of the beef consumption by low mercury fish.The authors of that study said that this will reduce mortality from cardiovascular disease.

Replace Red Meat And Processed Red Meat

Replace Red Meat And Processed Red Meat

Conclusion

A new study in the British Medical Journal showed that an increase in red meat consumption of only ½ serving per day for 8 years caused an increased mortality of 9% over the following 8 years. With regard to processed red meat the mortality was even bigger, namely 13%. The researchers replaced some of the meat with white chicken meat or vegetables and the mortality normalized.

In contrast, a Japanese study showed that there was no increase in cardiovascular disease with the consumption of up to 100 grams of beef or other meat products over 16 years.

Using antibiotics as growth promoters illegal in Japan and Europe

I pointed out before that there is literature explaining why there is a discrepancy: the beef industry in the US feeds the animals antibiotics as growth promoters. This changes the bowel flora in humans who eat the beef. The changed bacterial strains in the gut use carnitine from beef and make trimethylamine N-oxide (TMAO). This is a toxin that causes both cardiovascular disease and cancer. This explains why in the US beef is one of the culprits that causes heart attacks and colorectal cancer. In Japan this is not the case. Both Japan and Europe do not use antibiotics as growth promoters in the cattle industry as it is prohibited.

In the US it is likely safe to eat organic meats (beef, chicken) as these meats will not contain antibiotics. Due to the numerous additives in processed red meat, it is still a sensible idea to skip these products!

Jun
22
2019

Ultraprocessed Food Kills

The British Medical Journal published two papers that showed that ultraprocessed food kills. The first paper showed that highly processed food causes heart attacks and strokes. Another paper in the same journal showed that mortality is significantly increased when people consume highly processed food. Both papers were reviewed by CNN.

Food categories

Food questionnaires were administered over 24 hours every 2 years from every participant using the NOVA classification system.

There were 4 categories.

  • Category 1 consisted of “unprocessed or minimally processed” food. This included legumes, vegetables, fruits, milk, eggs, meats, poultry, fish and seafood, yogurt, grains and natural juice.
  • Next was category 2 of “processed ingredients”. This included salt, sugar, honey, olive oil, butter and lard.
  • Category 3 consisted of “processed foods“. This included breads, cheeses, beer, wine, and cured traditional ham and bacon.
  • Finally, category 4 consisted of “ultraprocessed foods”. This included sausages, flan, chorizo, mayonnaise, pizza, cookies, potato chips, chocolates candies, artificially sweetened beverages including whisky, gin and rum.

Study on cardiovascular risk

A study from France followed more than 105,000 people for 5.2 years. The participants filled out food questionnaires every 6 months. The foods consumed were classified according to the NOVA categories. The results showed that the men’s diet consisted to 17.6% of heavily processed foods while the diet of women consisted of 17.3% heavily processed food. Each 10% increment of highly processed food (called “ultraprocessed” food) had an association with 12% higher risk of cardiovascular disease, 13% more heart attacks and 11% more strokes. The researchers could also show that a decrease in ultraprocessed food was leading to less percentage of these diseases.

Mortality risk when consuming ultraprocessed food

A similar study involving close to 20,000 participants in Spain that had a long observation time of 15 years (from 1999 to 2014). The 4 food categories were as mentioned above.

A person eating more than 4 ultraprocessed items per day or more had a 62% increase of death rate in comparison to those who ate processed food less frequently. Each additional ultraprocessed food item added another 18% of mortality risk. Maira Bes-Rastrollo, professor of Preventive Medicine and Public Health at Universidad de Navarra, Medical School said: “These results are in agreement with other recent results based on populations in France and the United States. If all the different study results align, despite the separate research groups using dissimilar populations, diverse age ranges and different methodologies, then this lends support to a possible cause-effect relationship between ultraprocessed foods and poor health.”

Discussion

You may remember that your grandparents reminded you not to eat “junk food”. Often junk food is consisting of ultraprocessed foods. Both of these independent studies from France and from Spain have shown that there is a significant risk of heart attacks and strokes associated with the consumption of ultraprocessed foods. In addition, there is also a significant mortality risk when you consume ultraprocessed food. The key is to learn from this and cut down on processed foods; instead eat foods that are less processed and are wholesome for you. Eat vegetables, fruit, nuts and stay away from the grocery store’s shelves with processed foods.

Ultraprocessed Food Kills

Ultraprocessed Food Kills

Conclusion

What your grandparents used to tell you about processed foods is now available as two separate publications from the British Medical Journal. The less processed food you consume, the healthier your food intake is. You will enjoy better health. This is the simple message. Avoiding ultraprocessed food will help you to avoid heart disease, heart attacks and strokes. In addition you will have a longer life expectancy. It is up to us to translate these findings into reality for ourselves.

Dec
22
2018

Biological Age Is Different From The Chronological Age

Biological age is different from the chronological age said professor Morgan Levine from Yale Medical School. She is working in the department of pathology. She has found in her research that people of the same chronological age have very different biological ages. From a biological standpoint they may be much younger or older than their chronological age. When people are younger than their chronological age, they have less disease and less mortality. This article has reviewed the facts.

Measuring biological age

Dr. Levine also has developed tools how to determine the biological age. And when the biological age is higher than the chronological age, she recommends lifestyle changes that will set back the biological clock. We age differently according to what we eat, how our genetic make-up is, which we cannot change, whether we are physically active and what environmental toxins we are exposed to. So, the biological age determines our health status and what our final life expectancy will be.

Biomarkers for biological age

A simple blood test that your family doctor can order consists of the following. A fasting blood sugar, kidney and liver tests, immune tests and inflammatory tests. In addition the doctor will want to know whether you are smoking or not, how much alcohol you consume and how much red meat and processed meat you eat. A computer program processes these results, which determines your biological age.

Lifestyle improvements can lower biological age

Biological age testing has a strength built in. By changing your lifestyle you can lower it. When you exercise more regularly and switch to eating a Mediterranean diet you can lower your biological age. Other studies have shown that the Mediterranean diet is anti-inflammatory. A telomere test, which also determines the biological age, is fixed. It is not easily changed by dietary measures and increasing your exercise.

Dr. Levine said: “I think the most exciting thing about this research is that these things aren’t set in stone.”

Putting the biological age to the test

Dr. Levine was curious what her own biological age was. She entered her blood test data and lifestyle facts into the computer. She was surprised that her biological age was not as good as her first assumption. Now she is trying to get more sleep, has increased her exercise level and improved her diet.

Her research team is working on getting the algorithm online so that everyone will be able to put one’s blood tests and other data into the computer program and calculate the biological age. The program will also recommend what steps are likely most helpful to increase one’s health and decrease the biological age.

Lower your biological age

No one wants to live a long life, if they are in pain and have various illnesses like arthritis or Alzheimer’s. But things are different, if they can change lifestyle factors and maintain a low biological age for a long time. Now they can stay active, have no pains and are able to contribute to society.

“By delaying the onset of diseases and cognitive and physical functioning problems people can still be engaged in society,” Dr. Levine said. “I think that is the ideal we should be striving for.”

Other literature about biological age

Inflammation increases the biological age

In this publication the authors stressed that inflammation is the common denominator for developing disease and premature aging. The authors stress further that it is mandatory to change one’s lifestyle to lower the biological age and live longer.

Diastolic blood pressure predicts mortality

In an older study the diastolic blood pressure was related to mortality. The higher the diastolic blood pressure was, the higher the mortality.  The authors also noted that it was the persons with the higher biological age who were at the highest risk of dying.

Scientific study about the predictors for the biological age

Here is a scientific study that examines predictors for the biological age.  This is not easy reading, but I placed it here for completeness sake.

Link to a site that can calculate your biological age

Here is a link to a site that calculates your biological age. It is probably not as good as Dr. Levine’s computer analysis will be when it is available. However, it is a good approximation to what it will be like.

Biological Age Is Different From The Chronological Age

Biological Age Is Different From The Chronological Age

Conclusion

The dream of staying younger for longer is not new. Research has shown that we actually can do something about it. If we look after our lifestyle, don’t smoke, don’t drink excessively, eat a sensible Mediterranean-type diet and exercise regularly, our biological age will be less than our chronological age. It is the biological age that determines how old we get and whether or not we will suffer from age-related illnesses. Researchers also found out that when your biological age is younger than your actual age mortality will occur later. The math is simple. Let’s assume that your biological age is 15 to 20 years younger than your chronological age. As the average life expectancy presently is 80 years, your life expectancy can increase to 95 or 100 years.

Sep
15
2018

Moderate Carb Intake Has The Lowest Mortality

A 25-year long study has shown that a moderate carb intake has the lowest mortality. A comprehensive study from the US has followed more than 15,000 men and women for 25 years. They were between 45-64 years when they entered the study and they were from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds. The authors chose mortality as an end point. Dr. Sara Seidelmann is a clinical and research fellow in cardiovascular medicine from Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston. She was the lead author of this study. The research group used food questionnaires and analyzed the carb content in the food. They also determined what percentage of the food composition was of animal origin or plant origin.

Research study finds moderate carb intake has the lowest mortality

The main findings of the study were that less than 40% of carbs in the diet led to an increased death rate with a mortality of between 1.4-fold and 1.8-fold. On the other hand, more than 70% of carbs in the diet also had increased mortality rates of 1.2-fold. The lowest mortality was in the group that consumed a diet where carbs were between 50% and 55%. Dr. Seidelmann explained that in terms of life expectancy the result of the study could be summarized as follows. A 50-year-old person had another 33 years to live when carb intake was in the moderate range. The low-carb person had only another 29 years to live (4 years less than the moderate carb person). The high-carb person lived another 32 years, 1 year less than the moderate carb person.

Plant-derived versus animal-derived fat and protein

The study showed that there was increased longevity when carbohydrates were exchanged for proteins and fats from plant sources. Mortality was 18% less for this group. Conversely, when carbs were replaced for animal-derived fat or protein mortality was 18% more!

Dr. Seidelmann noted that this study was coming from a US based population. In the case of an Asian group they would consume much more carbs on average, but they would replace a lot of the animal fat and protein with fish. Fish is a healthier source of protein and fat than beef or pork.

A moderate carb intake group that used protein and fat from animal sources was compared to plant sources. When protein and fat had the origin from lamb, beef, pork, and chicken the mortality over 25 years was higher. When protein and fat came from vegetables, such as nuts, peanut butter, seeds and whole-grain breads there was a lower mortality rate.

Other studies comparing the effect of animal protein versus plant protein

  1. A 2016 study that had gone on for 49 years was involving 131,342 participants. Animal protein intake showed an association with higher mortality from heart attacks and strokes. 3% of energy from processed red meat was now substituted by an equivalent amount of plant protein. This reduced the all-cause mortality by 34%, for unprocessed red meat by 12% and for egg by 19%.

 

  1. Red meat is cancer-producing. Several studies have shown this. When red meat is digested, cancer-causing substances are released that can be the cause of cancer in the lining of the stomach and the colon. The above link says we should limit red meat consumption to 65 grams (2oz.) per day or 2 servings (130 grams or 4 oz.) 3 to 4 times per week. We should avoid eating more than 455 grams (1 pound) of lean red meat per week.

Triglycerides are an independent risk factor for heart attacks

In this publication evidence is also present that triglycerides are an independent risk factor that can cause heart attacks.

When you eat too many carbs, the body produces the excess you don’t need into triglycerides, and it deposits its subsequently as fat in fatty tissue.  Physical activity burns up some of the triglycerides. But when we eat too much refined sugar and starchy foods, there will be an excess of triglycerides putting our blood vessels and our hearts at risk.

Regular exercise prevents disease and premature deaths

Many studies have shown that regular exercise prevents heart attacks and premature deaths. We even know the mechanism of why this is so. Exercise releases nitric oxide ((NO) from our blood vessels, which widens the arteries. This also prevents high blood pressure. Exercise elevates the protective HDL cholesterol. When regular exercisers were compared to a non-active group they had a 41% lower risk of death. All-cause hospitalizations were down by 21% and cardiac hospitalizations were down 32%.

Discussion

  1. Barry Sears is the inventor of the Zone Diet. I attended a lecture in 2001 at an Anti-Aging Conference in San Diego. Dr. Sears was the keynote speaker at this conference. He stressed that a diet with 55% of complex carbs would be the best diet. It is interesting that Dr. Seidelmann in the study mentioned in beginning of this blog found the same thing. The lowest mortality was in the group that consumed a diet where carbs were between 50% and 55%.
  2. The second point that is important to note is that it matters whether we eat protein derived from animals or from plants. Even small steps help. When we reduce our animal protein intake by only 3% of the energy intake, and replace it by plant protein, there is a significant reduction in mortality.
  3. Exercise is rarely mentioned in relation to diets. But exercise needs to be included every day and you will experience a reduction of cardiac hospitalizations of 32% as mentioned above.
Moderate Carb Intake Has The Lowest Mortality

Moderate Carb Intake Has The Lowest Mortality

Conclusion

A moderate carb intake, as is the case in the Mediterranean diet and in the Zone Diet of Barry Sears, has the lowest mortality rate. Complex carbs (in vegetables) are absorbed much slower. As a result the risk for heart attacks is much lower. The opposite is true for refined carbs from sugar. They cause heart attacks and strokes with premature mortality. Dr. Sara Seidelmann led a study at the Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston that lasted 25 years. Less than 40% of carbs in the diet led to an increased death rate with a mortality of between 1.4-fold and 1.8-fold. These diets are paleo-type diets, the Atkins diet and the ketogenic diet. More than 70% of carbs in the diet also had increased mortality rates of 1.2-fold.

The healthiest diet

People who consumed a diet where carbs were between 50% and 55% had the lowest mortality rate (Zone Diet). Another finding of this study, which was confirmed by others is that animal-based protein is unhealthier than plant-based protein. Even replacing 3% of energy from an animal-based diet with plant-derived protein delayed mortality significantly.

If you want to live longer and stay healthy you need to critically evaluate what you eat.

Incoming search terms:

May
27
2018

Benefits Of Eating Nuts

You hear from time to time that there are benefits of eating nuts. But you don’t often see more details about it. I came across an article entitled “Nut lovers rejoice: Your favorite snack protects your heart”. It stressed that nuts prevent heart attacks. I will review some of this information here, but also touch on other aspects.

What nuts contain

Nuts contain fiber, unsaturated fatty acids, protein, vitamin E, folate and many minerals (zinc, potassium, magnesium). These ingredients have their own positive effects on your metabolism. For instance the fiber will lower cholesterol and triglycerides in your blood, which are risk factors for heart attacks. Vitamin E is a powerful antioxidant. Here is a review that shows why eating nuts makes a difference for your health. Despite all of the good that nuts do, you need to keep an eye at the overall quantity of nuts you eat. Nuts can contain up to 80% as oil, even though they are good oils. But the extra calories associated with the oil can make you gain some weight. When you add nuts to your diet you need to subtract some of the lesser quality saturated fats, so that your overall calorie balance does not change.

How do we know that nuts are healthy?

A British study from 2016 did a meta-analysis of people who ate nuts versus people who did not include nuts in their diet. 10 studies showed that eating nuts reduced mortality from all causes by 19%. In 5 studies where cardiovascular mortality was measured, a reduction of 27% was noticeable. Congestive heart disease in 3 studies showed a reduction by 34% when the patients consumed nuts. Stroke mortality was 17% less, as 3 studies showed. This is just an example of a few studies that show how effective supplementation of your diet by a few nuts here and there can be on the general mortality. It especially applies to mortality which is due to heart disease and strokes. Other effects of nut consumption are the reduction of atrial fibrillation, congestive heart failure and abdominal aneurysm (each by 15 to 20%).

Allergic reactions to nuts

A small percentage of people are allergic to various nuts. Nuts can cause a severe asthma attack, if the person has been sensitized to them in the past. They can cause angioneurotic edema in a small portion of people who may have inherited this condition. Tree nut allergies can cause anaphylaxis as is explained in this link.

The right dosage of nuts

This Australian website says that 30 grams of nuts, which is a handful of them would be the right dose per day. This is about 1 ounce per day. By including a variety of nuts your nutritional content will equal out. Some nuts have more calcium (almonds); others have more plant sterols (pistachios) or more fiber (pecans).

How bias can get introduced into medical literature

The Karolinska institute in Sweden analyzed the lifestyle and behavior pattern of nut lovers. Nut lovers were also into other healthy lifestyles: they smoked less than non-nut lovers. Nut lovers were leaner, physically more active and drank less alcohol.

They also ate more fruit and vegetables. Nut-lovers’ blood pressure was lower than the blood pressure of non-nut lovers. And people who consumed nuts on average had better education. Some of these lifestyle patterns can also protect the heart and contribute to less strokes. The researcher must be vigilant to control for the other lifestyle patterns except for the difference in the nut consumption when looking for the effect of nut consumption. If this is not done, there could be confounding, which introduces a bias into the final results.

Combine nut supplements and adopt a healthy lifestyle

This said, you know now about the results of good research. It is best to not be concerned about biases any more. For the average consumer it is important to apply what we know: use nuts regularly (about 30 grams per day, which is a handful). But it would not be a bad idea to adopt some of the other healthy lifestyles that nut eaters tend to have. In other words, exercise regularly, don’t smoke, cut out sugar, drink less alcohol and eat fruit and vegetables regularly. This way you will amplify the health promoting effect of the nut supplements.

Benefits Of Eating Nuts

Benefits Of Eating Nuts

Conclusion

We learnt that nut consumption is healthy. Only a small number of people who are allergic to nuts have to avoid them. The majority of people benefit from incorporating a small amount of nuts into their diet. Research has shown that it lowers mortality in general, lowers cardiovascular mortality and mortality from congestive heart disease. Eating nuts also reduced stroke mortality and lowers the risk of atrial fibrillation. When research is done, confounding factors like healthy lifestyles have to be controlled. But when an individual wants to reduce health risks, it does not harm to use healthy lifestyle factors along with nuts to reduce any risk. It will amplify the healthy effects of eating nuts.

Nov
18
2017

You May Want To Cut Down Coffee Consumption

Many people drink too much coffee, so you may want to cut down coffee consumption. With all the good news about the health benefits when drinking coffee, some people went too far. They have overdone what was supposed to be good for them. Recently a study came out that tells you how to cut down coffee consumption.

But first I like to review the issue whether to drink caffeinated or decaf coffee. Next I will tell you how you can switch to decaf coffee.

Caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee have the same health benefits

  1. Recently a large study showed that coffee, caffeinated or not, has a connection with lower overall mortality.
  2. Coffee has long been a subject of heated discussions. Some praise it, and others condemn it. There are multiple past studies; some showed health benefits, some did not. This is why the Department of Nutrition, Harvard School of Public Health in Boston, MA. did a larger study. The purpose was to re-examine the health benefits for both caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee.

Mortality data regarding people who drank decaf coffee or regular coffee

Researchers assessed mortality among 74,890 women in the Nurses’ Health Study (NHS). Another 93,054 women in the NHS 2 study became part of this. And 40,557 men in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study were also part in this large study. The medium follow-up for all of these three groups was 22.5 years. 19,524 women and 12,432 men died during that time period. Ming Ding is a doctoral student at the Harvard School of Public Health department of nutrition. She was the lead author of this study. She pointed out that in the past there were confounding problems. Many studies had shown that both caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee consumption lowered the risk of cardiovascular disease. But the results in many studies were blurred. Studies often did not distinguish between smokers and non-smokers. This meant that the cardiovascular risk from smoking wiped out a beneficial effect from coffee drinking.

Confounding and other factors

Ding’s studies took this into account and also other confounding factors like how much sugary soda pop people were drinking and whether or not they were eating well. In addition they normalized for other factors that could interfere like drinking alcohol and eating red meat. Without normalizing for the factors mentioned above the study results were as follows. Study participants who had less than a cup of coffee and three cups a day had a 5% to 9% lower risk of dying than those who drank no coffee. Those who drank more than three cups a day did not see any benefit.

Dose response curve for regular and decaf coffee

After eliminating all the confounding factors researchers compared the various groups again, and the following linear dose-response curve emerged:

  • Less than 1 cup of coffee per day: 6% lower death rates than non-coffee drinkers.
  • 1 cup to 3 cups of coffee per day: 8% lower death rates.
  • 3 to 5 cups of coffee per day: 15% lower death rates.
  • More than 5 cups of coffee per day: 12% lower death rates.

Coffee consumption reduces diabetes and heart disease

Ming’s study connected with another research paper that had shown that coffee drinkers have a lower risk of developing type 2 diabetes and also less heart disease. She found that both, caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee, reduced the risk of getting diabetes later in life. When asked about what would be responsible for the reduced death rates with coffee consumption, she explained: “There are at least two known chemicals in coffee, namely lignans and chlorogenic acid that could reduce inflammation and help control blood sugar, both of which could help reduce the risk of heart disease”. You may want to cut down coffee consumption because you know decaf coffee does the same as regular coffee.

Other details about the caffeinated/decaf coffee study

Although there seems to be a linear response up to 5 cups of coffee consumption, above 5 cups this linear relationship disappeared. It was not explained whether there was a saturation point, whether there was yet another hidden confounding factor or whether there were detrimental effects on the adrenal glands with too much caffeinated coffee consumption.

Another finding was that it did not matter whether the coffee was regular (caffeinated) coffee or decaffeinated coffee. The results were identical.

Many other studies did not have the large numbers to show whether or not decaffeinated coffee was as effective in preventing heart disease as regular coffee.

Suicide rates and coffee consumption

There was another peculiar finding: suicides were down by 20% to 36%, if a person drank at least one cup of coffee per day. If a person consumed less than 1 cup of coffee per day the suicide rate was 36% higher than the control group with no coffee consumption. This is a rather peculiar finding, particularly for the consumption of less than 1 cup of coffee. Other studies also showed a decrease in suicide rates with coffee consumption.

Although previous studies had shown a reduction in liver and prostate cancer, after the removal of confounding factors this study did not show any effects on cancer causation or cancer death rates with coffee consumption.

Discussion

The Department of Nutrition, Harvard School of Public Health in Boston, MA has excelled in high quality nutritional studies for decades. This study is particularly important, because it is so large, giving it more statistical power. Secondly, the observation time of an average of 22.5 years is longer than most coffee studies in the past. Add to this the removal of the “noise” (called confounding factors) that interfered with the objective of the study, and you end up with a very meaningful result.

Clear results after confounding factors were removed

The important findings were that both caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee have the same effect of saving and extending lives. Perhaps you want to drink not more than 5 cups of coffee per day. That lowers your risk of premature death by 15%. It is most likely that it is the effect of lowering the rate of diabetes and heart attack rates that is responsible for the risk reduction. At least this was the opinion of the chief investigator. Cancer rates were not lowered by coffee consumption.

I sleep better when I drink decaffeinated coffee, so for me the notion that decaffeinated coffee and regular coffee have the same effect was important.

Revisit the statement: “you may want to cut down coffee consumption”

Now we know that there is no difference in benefits whether the coffee is caffeinated or not. Those of you who consume 3 to 5 cups of decaf coffee already enjoy a 15% reduction in risk of cardiovascular disease.

Those of you who take the same amount of regular coffee may get into a caffeine dependency problem. Because every time the caffeine stimulation wears off, you yearn for yet another cup of coffee. You need your fix, and this becomes a dependency problem. You have conditioned your body to that regular dose of caffeine, even though it is the bioflavonoids that are reducing mortality while caffeine is neutral.

My experience of coffee withdrawal

When I came across Ding’s research findings I was glad that now there was clarification about whether decaf coffee was as good as regular coffee. The next step for me was to cut out regular coffee and replace it by decaf coffee. Formerly I had been drinking 5 mugs of coffee daily (translated into 500 mg of caffeine daily). When I decided to quit this habit, I figured I should do it cold turkey from one day to the next. To my surprise this was a much bigger deal than I had thought.

Withdrawal symptoms

I craved the next cup of coffee, and I drank a decaf coffee. It did not help: Still, there was this craving for regular coffee! Yawning, restlessness and tiredness were symptoms that followed me all day long. Then there was irritability, a mild headache and almost flu-like symptoms. Eventually I went to sleep and woke up one hour later feeling a bit more energetic. But two hours later I had to lay down again. I was feeling that bushed. The following few days went better. There was more energy. But I still liked a noonday nap of about 1 hour.

Benefits of getting off regular coffee

This was not like me! Normally I have lots of energy and I don’t need naps. It took me 1-½ weeks to get over my 5-cup a day coffee withdrawal. But it was 100% worth it! Since then my energy is back to normal. I don’t have to chase coffee houses on a trip or ensure there is always a cup of regular coffee available for me at home (work does not apply, because I am retired). If I want I can replace my beloved coffee with another fluid. I love lemon juice sweetened with stevia instead of my decaf coffee. It is liberating that I no longer depend on the caffeine. But I still like the flavor of decaf coffee, and there is something enjoyable about the fragrance of freshly brewed coffee. And so I drink 3 to 4 cups of decaf coffee a day.

How to cut down coffee consumption

Here is a 2016 study from the Johns Hopkins University where 34 patients on 600 mg of caffeine per day received a 1-hour lecture about coffee withdrawal followed by a 6-week diary of their coffee consumption. They were asked to reduce their caffeine consumption down to 50 mg by week 6 of the coffee elimination program. Tests followed with salivary caffeine levels 6, 12 and 26 weeks after coffee cessation. There was also a 1-year follow-up telephone conversation. The results were that there was good compliance. Saliva caffeine levels verified this. The diaries over the first 6 weeks showed that the participants had gradually eliminated caffeine consumption. Perhaps this was a more humane way than my “cold-turkey” approach.

You May Want To Cut Down Coffee Consumption

You May Want To Cut Down Coffee Consumption

Conclusion

Many people are sensitive to too much caffeine consumption in coffee and other caffeinated beverages. But since the Harvard study that I mentioned above there is no need to overdose coffee or tea consumption. Decaf coffee has the same effect on lowering death rates by 15%, as does regular coffee. It pays to avoid caffeine, as you will avoid caffeine dependency. Drink decaf coffee instead!

I also discussed that withdrawal from regular coffee can be done more gently over a 6 week period. I did it from one day to the next and had a 1-½ week long withdrawal reaction. Do it slower or faster, whatever works best for you. The end result will be the same. Then enjoy it that you no longer depend on caffeine!

More info: https://www.askdrray.com/coffee-could-be-a-lifesaver/

Dec
26
2015

Coffee Could Be A Lifesaver

Coffee could be a lifesaver. But coffee has long been a subject of heated discussions. It has been praises or condemnations. Researchers designed many studies in the past; some showed health benefits, some did not. A new, larger study was done by the Department of Nutrition, Harvard School of Public Health in Boston, MA to re-examine this issue for both caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee.

Here is the study showing why coffee could be a lifesaver

Mortality was determined among 74,890 women in the Nurses’ Health Study (NHS), 93,054 women in the NHS 2, and 40,557 men in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study after a medium follow-up of 22.5 years. 19,524 women and 12,432 men died during that time period. Ming Ding is a doctoral student in the Harvard School of Public Health department of nutrition and was the lead author of the study that was published in the medical journal “Circulation”. She pointed out that in the past there were confounding problems: although many studies had shown that both caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee consumption lowered the risk of cardiovascular disease, the results in many studies were blurred. Studies often did not distinguish between smokers and nonsmokers; so a beneficial effect from coffee drinking was wiped out by the cardiovascular risk from smoking.

Ding’s studies took this into account and also other confounding factors like how much sugary soda pop people were drinking and whether or not they were eating well. In addition they normalized for other factors that could interfere like drinking alcohol and eating red meat.

Results of the coffee study

Without normalizing for the factors mentioned above the study results were as follows. Study participants had less than a cup of coffee and three cups a day had a 5% to 9% lower risk of dying than those who drank no coffee. Those who drank more than three cups a day did not see any benefit.

However, when the researchers removed all the confounding factors and compared the various groups again, the following emerged:

  • Less than 1 cup of coffee per day: 6% lower death rates than non-coffee drinkers.
  • 1 cup to 3 cups of coffee per day: 8% lower death rates.
  • 3 to 5 cups of coffee per day: 15% lower death rates.
  • More than 5 cups of coffee per day: 12% lower death rates.

Both caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee reducing mortality rates

Ming Ding was associated with another research paper that had shown that coffee drinkers have a lower risk of developing type 2 diabetes and heart disease. She found that both caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee reduced the risk of getting diabetes later.

When asked about what would be responsible for the reduced death rates with coffee consumption, Ding explained. “There are at least two known chemicals in coffee, namely lignans and chlorogenic acid. They both could reduce inflammation and help control blood sugar. Also, both could help reduce the risk of heart disease”.

Although there seems to be a linear response up to 5 cups of coffee consumption, above 5 cups this linear relationship disappeared. The researchers could not explain whether coffee consumption reached a saturation point, whether there was yet another obscure confounding factor or whether there were detrimental effects on the adrenal glands with too much coffee consumption.

Other findings like decreased suicide rates with coffee consumption

Another finding was that it did not matter whether the coffee contained caffeine or was caffein free. The results were identical.

Many other studies did not have the large numbers to show whether or not coffee without caffeine was as effective in preventing heart disease.

Finally, there was another peculiar finding; suicide rates were down by 20% to 36%, if a person drank at least one cup of coffee per day. But if a person consumed less than 1 cup of coffee per day the suicide rate was 36% higher than the control group with no coffee consumption. This is a rather peculiar finding, particularly for the consumption of less than 1 cup of coffee. But other studies have also shown a decrease in suicide rates with coffee consumption.

No effect on liver and prostate cancer

Previous studies had shown a reduction in liver and prostate cancer. But after the removal of confounding factors this study did not show any effects on cancer causation. Cancer death rates also did not show a reduction with coffee consumption.

Discussion

The Department of Nutrition, Harvard School of Public Health in Boston, MA produced high quality nutritional studies for decades. But this study is particularly important, because it is so large giving it more statistical power; secondly, the observation time of an average of 22.5 years is longer than most coffee studies in the past. The investigators also removed the noise (called confounding factors). This helped to accomplish the objective of the study and they ended up with a very meaningful result.

Apart from saving lives by drinking coffee, diabetes and heart attack rates lower as well

The important findings were that both caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee have the same effect of saving lives. Perhaps you want to drink not more than 5 cups of coffee per day. That lowers your risk of premature death by 15%. What counts is the effect of lowering the rate of diabetes and heart attack rates. This is most likely responsible for the risk reduction. At least this was the opinion of the chief investigator. The study showed that coffee consumption did not lead to a reduction in cancer rates.

I sleep better when I drink decaffeinated coffee. So for me the notion that decaffeinated coffee had the same effect as regular coffee was important.

Coffee Could Be A Lifesaver

Coffee Could Be A Lifesaver

Conclusion

Here is a study that is large enough, went long enough, and showed decisively that coffee can reduce the death rate. Both caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee showed the effect of reducing the death rate. The mortality reduction was by 15% up to 5 cups of coffee per day. This finding was true for both males and females. Coffee seems to also reduce the suicide risk by a mechanism that has not yet been determined. Do you want to live 15% longer than your previous life expectancy would have been without coffee? Then you may now have your coffee and enjoy it!

Oct
24
2014

TACT Study Proves Effectiveness of Chelation

Even though the Trial to Assess Chelation Therapy (TACT Study) has been published in March 2013 (Ref. 1), it still needs to make its way into the common public knowledge. The National Institute of Health was noticing an “alarming 68% increase” of chelation therapy between 2002 and 2007. These patients had problems with previous heart attacks and others had angina due to coronary artery disease, so they sought relief through intravenous chelation treatments. The purpose of the TACT study was to see whether chelation treatments with EDTA were safe and whether they would show any benefits when compared to a placebo group.

TACT study design

A total of 1708 patients were randomized into two groups, 869 treated with EDTA chelation therapy and 869 in treated with placebo infusions of normal saline/dextrose. Treatments were blinded (nobody knew what was given in the intravenous). 134 research sites in Canada and the US were involved in this trial including the Mayo Clinic. Patients had to be at least 50 years old, but the average age was 65 years. They had all a prior heart attack, but not less than 6 weeks before enrolment; on average they did have their heart attack 4.6 years before enrolment. Participants had to quit smoking at least 3 months before entering into the study and if they had revascularization procedures (bypass surgeries or stents), this had to be done more than 6 months in the past.

31% of the study population had diabetes. 83% had revascularization procedures done in the past. The majority of patients were taking heart medications (72% beta blockers, 73% statins to lower cholesterol and 84% aspirin to thin the blood).

65% completed 40 infusions, 76% completed at least 30 infusions.

The chelation infusion was the standard infusion usually used in chelation clinics, namely containing EDTA (the chelating agent), salts and vitamins as indicated in this Mayo clinic summary report. The follow-up period was for 4 years. There was a drop-out of 30% for various reasons and 17% refused their consent to carry on in the study.

TACT Study Proves Effectiveness Of Chelation

TACT Study Proves Effectiveness Of Chelation

Results of the TACT study

Overall mortality in the chelation group was down 2.8% versus the placebo group. Heart attacks in the chelation group were down 19.5%; strokes down 20% and hospitalization rates were down 28.6% when compared to the values of the placebo group.

Diabetic patients (the subgroup of 31%) appear to have greater benefits from chelation treatments than the non-diabetic ones. The diabetic group benefitted by 39% with regard to risk reduction (strokes, heart attacks, mortality) versus the non-diabetic chelation group (only a 4% reduction).

Perhaps as important as the results of the effect of the chelation study versus the placebo group was the fact that the side-effect profile was indistinguishable between the two groups. This establishes for the first time that chelation therapy is safe and that it also has beneficial effects.

It is interesting that when the results of the TACT Study were announced at the 2012 American Heart Association meeting in Los Angeles, the majority of cardiologists did not believe the results (that chelation was effective); instead they were looking for alternative explanations to explain the effect and suggested that this study needed to be repeated again.

What are the benefits of chelation therapy?

Originally EDTA was used to treat children with lead poisoning in Germany. However, workers who were exposed to lead containing paints in various industries also were described to have improve significantly with EDTA chelation (see this chelation history link).

In the 1990’s environmental concerns about heavy metal poisoning of the earth atmosphere came more into the forefront. This 2007 paper reports about heavy metal poisoning in detail.

A new concern for those who like organic food is the use of copper sulfate by organic food growers to spray against fungal and bacterial growth on crop as copper sulfate is one of the 5 chemicals used in organic agriculture approved by the USDA.

Those who consume organic foods may inadvertently expose themselves to copper in their system. This will reduce zinc levels as zinc naturally counterbalances the effects of elevated copper levels. But normal zinc levels are needed for normal body function, particularly in males.

As I have explained in this blog before, chelation therapy and several other methods can detoxify the body. Pollution continues to play havoc with our system and we need to consider taking steps to counteract that. In this blog I explained that we live in a toxic world and I mentioned several steps we can take to counteract this including chelation therapy. Particularly heavy metals like lead, mercury, cadmium and copper will be reduced in the blood by intravenous EDTA chelation treatments.

Conclusion

I felt that I should take some time explaining the carefully conducted TACT Study that was a randomized double blind, government sponsored study examining the effects of chelation treatments. It showed that there were significant improvements in terms of cardiovascular recovery, but it also showed that it was entirely non-toxic. Chelation should be done by an American College for Advancement in Medicine (ACAM) certified practitioner to ensure that you get the same chelation treatment as described in the TACT Study. People with heart conditions will need 30 to 40 treatments (usually 1 week apart) to improve. However, a person with a normal heart who considers detoxification will only need 10 treatments initially (twice per week or weekly), then one every three months for maintenance. We all reside on the same planet and are exposed to ongoing pollution and food toxicity. Due to this reality the topic of chelation and detoxification is worth some serious consideration not only for patients with heart health issues.

More information about vitamins and detoxification: http://nethealthbook.com/health-nutrition-and-fitness/nutrition/vitamins-minerals-supplements/

Reference: 1. J. American Medical Association (March 27, 2013, Vol. 309, No. 12)

Last edited Nov. 8, 2014