Increasing Number Of Americans Have Insufficient Levels Of Vitamin D
 Average blood levels of vitamin D appear to have decreased in the United States between 1994 and 2004, according to a new report.

Clinicians previously believed the major health problems associated with vitamin D deficiency were rickets in children and reduced bone mineral content in adults, conditions reduced by fortifying foods with vitamin D, according to background information in the article. More recently, insufficient vitamin D levels have been associated with cancer, heart disease, infection and suboptimal health overall. Evidence suggests that levels of 30 nanograms per milliliter to 40 nanograms per milliliter may be needed for optimum health

“Vitamin D supplementation appears to mitigate the incidence and adverse outcomes of these diseases and may reduce all-cause mortality,” the authors write. However, currently recommended levels of supplementation—200 international units per day from birth to age 50, 400 international units per day from age 51 to 70 and 600 international units per day for adults age 71 and older—focus primarily on improving bone health. In addition, decreases in outdoor physical activities and successful campaigns to reduce sun exposure may have contributed to vitamin D insufficiency, since sunlight exposure is a main determinant of vitamin D status in humans.

Adit A. Ginde, M.D., M.P.H., of the University of Colorado Denver School of Medicine, Aurora, and colleagues compared levels of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D, a measure of the amount of vitamin D in the blood) from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III), collected between 1988 and 1994, to those collected during NHANES 2001-2004. Complete data were available for 18,883 participants in the first survey and 13,369 participants in the second survey.

“Overall, the mean [average] serum 25(OH)D level in the U.S. population was 30 nanograms per milliliter during the 1988-1994 collection and decreased to 24 nanograms per milliliter during the 2001-2004 collection,” the authors write. The prevalence of levels lower than 10 nanograms per milliliter increased from 2 percent to 6 percent between the two time periods, and fewer individuals had levels 30 nanograms per milliliter or higher (45 percent vs. 23 percent).

Racial and ethnic differences persisted throughout the surveys; among non-Hispanic blacks, the prevalence of 25(OH)D levels of less than 10 nanograms per milliliter increased from 9 percent to 29 percent and levels of more than 30 nanograms per milliliter or higher decreased from 12 percent to 3 percent.

“These findings have important implications for health disparities and public health,” the authors write. “We found that the mean serum 25(OH)D level in the U.S. population dropped by 6 nanograms per milliliter from the 1988-1994 to the 2001-2004 data collections. This drop was associated with an overall increase in vitamin D insufficiency to nearly three of every four adolescent and adult Americans.”

“Current recommendations for dosage of vitamin D supplements are inadequate to address this growing epidemic of vitamin D insufficiency,” they conclude. “Increased intake of vitamin D (1,000 international units per day or more)—particularly during the winter months and at higher latitudes—and judicious sun exposure would improve vitamin D status and likely improve the overall health of the U.S. population. Large randomized controlled trials of these higher doses of vitamin D supplementation are needed to evaluate their effect on general health and mortality.”

Senior author Dr. Camargo was supported by the Massachusetts General Hospital Center for D-receptor Activation Research, and he and co-author Dr. Liu were supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health.

Full Article and Credits

Spa Health Health and Wellness, New Research, health nutrition Cancer, Heart Disease, Vitamin D

Daily Red Meat Raises Chances Of Dying Early
Study Is First Large Analysis Of Link With Overall Health

The new study says, “If people want to be healthy and live longer, consume less red and processed meat,” global nutrition professor Barry Popkin said. 

Eating red meat increases the chances of dying prematurely, according to the first large study to examine whether regularly eating beef or pork increases mortality.

The study of more than 500,000 middle-aged and elderly Americans found that those who consumed about four ounces of red meat a day (the equivalent of about a small hamburger) were more than 30 percent more likely to die during the 10 years they were followed, mostly from heart disease and cancer. Sausage, cold cuts and other processed meats also increased the risk.

Previous research had found a link between red meat and an increased risk of heart disease and cancer, particularly colorectal cancer, but the new study is the first large examination of the relationship between eating meat and overall risk of death, and is by far the most detailed.

“The bottom line is we found an association between red meat and processed meat and an increased risk of mortality,” said Rashmi Sinha of the National Cancer Institute, who led the study published yesterday in the Archives of Internal Medicine.

In contrast, routine consumption of fish, chicken, turkey and other poultry decreased the risk of death by a small amount.

“The uniqueness of this study is its size and length of follow-up,” said Barry M. Popkin, a professor of global nutrition at the University of North Carolina, who wrote an editorial accompanying the study. “This is a slam-dunk to say that, ‘Yes, indeed, if people want to be healthy and live longer, consume less red and processed meat.’ ”

There are many explanations for how red meat might be unhealthy: Cooking red meat generates cancer-causing compounds; red meat is also high in saturated fat, which has been associated with breast and colorectal cancer; and meat is high in iron, also believed to promote cancer. People who eat red meat are more likely to have high blood pressure and cholesterol, which increases the risk of heart disease. Processed meats contain substances known as nitrosamines, which have been linked to cancer.

Although pork is often promoted as “white meat,” it is believed to increase the risk of cancer because of its iron content, Sinha said.

Regardless of the mechanism, the research provides new evidence that people should follow long-standing recommendations to minimize consumption of red meat, several experts said.

“The take-home message is pretty clear,” said Walter Willett, a nutrition expert at the Harvard School of Public Health. “It would be better to shift from red meat to white meat such as chicken and fish, which if anything is associated with lower mortality.”

The American Meat Institute, a trade group, dismissed the findings, however, saying they were based on unreliable self-reporting by the study participants.

“Meat products are part of a healthy, balanced diet, and studies show they actually provide a sense of satisfaction and fullness that can help with weight control. Proper body weight contributes to good health overall,” James H. Hodges, the group’s executive vice president, said in a written statement.

For the study, researchers analyzed data from 545,653 predominantly white volunteers, ages 50 to 71, participating in the National Institutes of Health-AARP Diet and Health Study. In 1995, the subjects filled out detailed questionnaires about their diets, including meat consumption. Over the next 10 years, 47,976 men and 23,276 women died.

After accounting for other variables that might confound the findings, such as smoking and physical activity, the researchers found that those who ate the most red meat — about a quarter-pound a day — were more likely to die of any reason, and from heart disease and cancer in particular, than those who ate the least — the equivalent of a couple of slices of ham a day.

Among women, those who ate the most red meat were 36 percent more likely to die for any reason, 20 percent more likely to die of cancer and 50 percent more likely to die of heart disease. Men who ate the most meat were 31 percent more likely to die for any reason, 22 percent more likely to die of cancer and 27 percent more likely to die of heart disease.

In contrast, those who consumed the most white meat were about 8 percent less likely to die during the study period than those who ate the least, the researchers found. Poultry contains more unsaturated fat, which improves cholesterol levels, and fish contains omega-3 fatty acids, which are believed to help reduce the risk of heart disease.

The risk also rose among those who consumed the most processed meat, which included any kind of sausage, cold cuts or hot dogs. Women who consumed the most processed meat (about an ounce a day) were about 25 percent more likely to die overall, about 11 percent more likely to die of cancer and about 38 percent more likely to die from heart disease, compared to those who ate the least. The men who ate the most processed meat were 16 percent more likely to die for any reason, about 12 percent more likely to die of cancer and about 9 percent more likely to die of heart disease.

Experts stressed that the findings do not mean that people need to eliminate red meat from their diet, but instead should avoid eating it every day.

“You can be very healthy being a vegetarian, but you can be very healthy being a non-vegetarian if you keep your red-meat intake low,” Willett said. “If you are eating meat twice a day and can cut back to once a day there’s a big benefit. If you cut back to two or three times a week there’s even more benefit. If you eliminate it entirely, there’s a little more benefit, but the big benefit is getting away from everyday red-meat consumption.”

In addition to the health benefits, a major reduction in the eating of red meat would probably have a host of other benefits to society, Popkin said: reducing water shortages and pollution, cutting energy consumption, and tamping down greenhouse gas emissions — all of which are associated with large-scale livestock production.

“There’s a big interplay between the global increase in animal food intake and the effects on climate change,” he said. “If we cut by a few ounces a day our red-meat intake, we would have big impact on emissions and environmental degradation.”

Full Article And Credits

Spa Health Cancer, Health Concerns, Health and Wellness, Heart Disease, New Research, health nutrition Meat and Cancer, Meat and Heart disease, Red Meat and Health

Embryonic vs. Adult Stem Cells: What’s the Difference? Which is Superior?

President Obama just signed an executive order clearing the way for Federal funds to be used in embryonic stem cell research.

But advocates of adult stem cells say there is no need to use embryonic stem cells since each person has billions of their own existing adult stem cells available to them or to science for research.

So, since it is quite clear that there is no shortage of adult stem cells, who the headlong rush to focus in on embryonic stem cells that are taken from aborted babies and have not shown any progress of working better than adult stem cells.

Conducting Talk Show interviews on this topic is a panel of expert guests spearheaded by Christian Drapeau.

During your interview, Christian Drapeau shares his theory that Adult Stem Cells are nothing less than the human body’s natural healing system. This idea has profound implications for every area of modern medicine. Drapeau contends that the idea that heart disease, diabetes, liver degeneration, and other medical conditions could become things of the past is no longer science fiction due to recent Adult Stem Cell research breakthroughs.

ABOUT CHRISTIAN DRAPEAU…
Christian Drapeau is America’s best known advocate for Adult Stem Cell research and the medical applications of Adult Stem Cells. He gained recognition when his breakthrough theory of Adult Stem Cells gained widespread interest across the scientific and medical communities.

Christian is a frequent speaker at scientific and business events worldwide with recent Adult Stem Cell presentations in Africa, South America, Asia, Europe, Mexico, Canada, and the United States. A featured Mensa national event speaker, Christian holds a BS in Neurophysiology from McGill University and a Master of Science in Neurology and Neurosurgery from the Montreal Neurological Institute.

Christian, Chief Science Officer at California’s STEMTech HealthSciences, is presently working on methods to enhance Adult Stem Cell production and delivery; collaborating with scientists and companies around the world on Adult Stem Cell applications. His latest book is, “The Stem Cell Theory of Healing, Regeneration and Repair.”

INTERVIEW QUESTIONS, ANSWERS AND TALKING POINTS:

1.What are stem cells?

A cell is the basic unit that makes up every organs and tissues of the body. In general, cells are specialized, meaning that they perform one specific task in the body. For example, a cell of the retina will detect light, a cell of the ear will react to sound, a cell of the pancreas will make insulin, etc. Generally, specialized cells do not multiply in the body. Contrary to all the other cells of the human body, stem cells are defined as having the unique property of being able to multiply almost endlessly and to have the ability to transform themselves in almost any other type of cells. In other words, stem cells are immortal cells that are nothing, yet they have the ability to become anything.

2.We hear about embryonic stem cells and adult stem cells, what is the difference between these two types of stem cells?

As their name implies, embryonic stem cells come from the early embryo. It is possible to isolate embryonic stem cells and to grow them in a test tube. Using various methods, still in the test tube, it is possible to make embryonic stem cells become cells of various tissues, like the heart or the liver or the pancreas, and then to inject these cells in various organs to support the organ’s function. Unfortunately, aside from ethical issues, the use of embryonic stem cells is still hindered by the fact embryonic stem cells can easily form tumors.

Adult stem cells on the other hand are found in any living organism. Here the term “adult” does not refer to the age of a person but rather to the fact that they are present at all time in the life of a person. Adult stem cells are present the day an infant is born; stem cells found in the umbilical cord for example are adult stem cells. Adult stem cells are not easy to grow in a test tube and do not easily become cells of other tissues in the test tube, a fact that led to the belief that adult stem cells are lesser stem cells when compared to embryonic stem cells. But recent scientific research has shown that this is hardly the case, adult stem cells have capabilities comparable to embryonic stem cells; but in the body, where it matters, not a the test. In the body, adult stem cells can multiply and become cells of virtually any tissue of the body.

3.What is the ethical issue surrounding embryonic stem cells that commonly referred to in the media?

Embryonic stem cells are isolated from human embryos left over after the process of in vitro fertilization. Typically, when parents cannot conceive and they resort to in vitro fertilization, eggs from the mother are artificially fertilized by sperm from the father. The embryos that are produced are then frozen to be later implanted in the mother. The procedure can be successful after the first implantation, but oftentimes it takes a number of attempts. And parents at times want more than one child. This is why many embryos are produced. When the procedure has been successful and the parents have had as many children as they want, the remaining embryos are kept frozen. And here is the core of the debate: after some time, these embryos are simply destroyed, thrown down the sink or in the trash. Keep in mind that these embryos are invisible to the naked eye. So many scientists are saying that instead of throwing them down the sink, we should use to save lives.

Overall, it is a very delicate question at the core of which is the determination of when does life begins and when is a person legally considered a person. If we determine that a person’s life begins at conception, and we agree with the general concept that life must be preserved at all cost, then this means that the life of an embryo must be preserved. In this case human embryos should not be used for scientific research or treatment. But this position raises a number of other equally complex questions.

What is the difference between killing a human embryo by isolating its stem cells or by simply throwing it in the trash? Is a person handling human embryos in a manner that is not optimal to preserve their lives guilty of criminal negligence? And if life must be preserved at all cost, should we allow the disposal of human embryos at all? And the question can get larger, because if we determine that life begins at conception, which takes place before the egg reaches the uterus, and that everything must be done to preserve life, then would a woman smoking cigarette be guilty of criminal negligence, since cigarette smoking reduces the ability of the embryo to naturally implant in the uterus?

As you can see, it is a very delicate question. So that’s the reason why I think that the recent scientific developments on adult stem cells are so fortunate, as they solve the ethical dilemma about the use of embryonic stem cells; we don’t have to use embryonic stem cells, adult stem cells can offer all the promises, without the risks and the ethical and moral dilemmas.

4.What is the recent scientific development about adult stem cells and what makes adult stem cells such an equally promising option when compared to embryonic stem cells?

The main source of stem cells in the body is the bone marrow. Traditional science tells us that the role of stem cells from the bone marrow is to become blood cells, essentially red blood cells, white blood cells and platelet, and that this is their limitation; they can only become blood cells. One of the greatest discoveries of our time is that aside from becoming blood cells, adult bone marrow stem cells can become cells of virtually any tissue of the body. Stem cells from the bone marrow can become cells of the heart, the liver, the pancreas, the lung, and even the brain. And not only is this a possibility, meaning that they can become cells of other tissues, but they do so every day of our lives; stem cells from the bone marrow constitute the natural renewal system of the body.

Anytime there is an injury, or simply the natural wear and tear of a tissue, the affected tissue sends a signal to the bone marrow to release stem cells. As the number of stem cells increases in the blood, the affected tissue also releases other compounds that attract stem cells to that tissue. When the stem cells circulate through the capillaries of that tissue, they are migrate out of the blood flow into the tissue. When they arrive in the tissue itself, stem cells multiply and slowly transform to become cells of that tissue. It is literally the natural renewal system of the body.

5.Christian Drapeau, your background is neurophysiology, what led you to the field of stem cell research?

Fifteen years ago I began investigating the health benefits of a little known plant called Aphanizomenon flos-aquae, in short AFA. AFA had been on the marketplace since the late 1970s, and many consumers were reporting increased mental clarity and energy, mood elevation, and an overall feeling of wellbeing. We soon discovered that AFA was an exceptional source of the compound phenylethylamine, a compound naturally produced by the brain that is known in neurology as “the molecule of love.” The presence of phenylethylamine in AFA explained many of the benefits reported by consumers. We also discovered in AFA the presence of a compound that helps maintain healthy inflammatory balance as well as a polysaccharide that supports immune functions.

But as we were investigating the effects of AFA on health, many consumers reported other benefits that we could not explain with what we knew of AFA. But the most intriguing was not the extent of the benefits as much as their wide variety. People reported benefits pertaining to the liver, pancreas, skin, muscles, lung, and even the brain. How could one product bring such a variety of benefits? For many years we had no possible explanation, no hypothesis, until the first demonstration, early in 2000, that stem cells from the bone marrow had the ability of becoming cells of the liver, the heart and the brain. When this was published, my colleague Dr. Jensen and I thought, “If stem cells from the bone marrow can become cells of the brain, heart and liver, which are some of the most complex types of cells, they must have the ability of becoming other types of cells, and if they do have this ability, then this cannot be just a simple observation, an anomaly, something of that magnitude has to be with a purpose. So in 2002 we published the hypothesis that stem cells from the bone constitute the natural renewal system of the body.

The reason why we were so interested in this view was that for the first time we had a hypothesis about how AFA could be working in the body. If a product were to support stem cell function, then as people consume this product and as stem cells migrate in various organs, then people would report a wide variety of benefits touching various organs and tissues. And that’s what we had with AFA. So we hypothesized that AFA was working in the body by supporting stem cell function.

6.And what did you discover?

We discovered that AFA contains a compound that specifically supports the release of stem cells from the bone marrow. This compound is not concentrated enough in AFA to have an effect, unless one takes a lot of AFA, which is too much. So we created an extract of AFA that concentrates this compound. This product is so far the only demonstrated Stem Cell Enhancer; consumption of 1 gram of this Stem Cell Enhancer supports the release of stem cells from the bone marrow and increases the number of circulating stem cells by an average of 25%, which is the equivalent of approximately 2-3 million new stem cells.

The important thing to bear in mind is that in this process of tissue renewal by stem cells, an important if not the most important parameter is the number of stem cells circulating in the blood. More stem cells circulating in the blood means that more stem cells are available for migration in various tissues, supporting the health of various tissues. So Stem Cell Enhancers support the body’s own innate system of renewal.

7.Could this be the solution to all diseases?

I understand that for many people the focus is on diseases, with such a discovery many people are wondering whether this product could get rid of health problems. But we cannot make such claims, as the FDA does not permit making health claims with dietary supplements. Let me simply say that stem cells from the bone marrow can become cells of the heart, the pancreas, the liver, the brain, the kidneys, the lung, the skin, the muscles, the retina… virtually any tissue of the body. For everyone, stem cells from the bone marrow constitute their natural renewal system. During the life of every individual, it is stem cells that maintain optimal health from the day we are born until the day we die. Supporting the natural ability of the body to renew itself is certainly one of the most powerful strategies to assist the body in being healthy.

But I would like to bring the discussion to a more global context, as these new discoveries about adult stem cells literally change the way we view health and wellness. Health is typically seen as what we have when we don’t have a disease, in other words health is somewhat defined as the absence of disease, but we all know that there is a vast gray area between optimal health and illness. A lot of people don’t have specific disease and yet they don’t have the energy they used to have, or the physical strength and flexibility they used to have, the stamina, the memory and concentration, eye sight, many things are not as good as they used to be. Stem cells are what allows the body to maintain optimal health.

You know, health is essentially a balance between cellular loss and cellular renewal. Every tissue of the body loses and replaces cells, and each tissue does so at a different rate.

For example, we have on average a new lining of the intestine every 5 days or so, a new pancreas and a new liver every few years, new lung every 4 years, a new heart every 20 to 40 years, and even a new brain, though here there is some controversy about the timeframe.

So if cellular loss takes place at a rate that is superior to the rate at which cellular renewal is taking place, sooner or later the organ that is affected will not be able to function optimally. So far in medicine we only look at the “degeneration” side of the equation. We try to slow down the degeneration process and when an organ fails to functional optimally we compensate for it in various ways. The discovery of the role of adult stem cells in the body gives us for the first time in history the ability of influencing the other side of the equation: the process of tissue rebuilding and repair. If it is possible to increase the number of circulating stem cells, then more stem cells are available for daily repair of tissues, supporting the natural process of tissue renewal.

So instead of talking about disease, let’s say that Stem Cell Enhancers support optimal health by assisting the body in renewing itself, compensating for the normal loss of cells. I believe there is no stronger strategy to help the body stay strong and healthy.

Full Article and Credits

Spa Health Health and Wellness, New Research, wellness Obama and Stem Cells, Stem Cells