(HealthDay News) -- The process by which yeast cells produce glucose may affect how long the cells -- and perhaps humans -- live, a new study has found.
The researchers found that the chemical process of acetylation, which is key to glucose production, influences yeast cell life and that this process depends on NuA4, an enzyme complex that plays a role in DNA repair.
Acetylation occurs when an acetyl group -- a molecule that is made of oxygen, carbon and hydrogen atoms -- bonds to another compound.
Genetically mutated yeast cells in which the acetylation process was always occurring lived up to 20 percent longer than normal yeast cells, the researchers found. Cells in which the acetylation process was shut off had their life span slashed by 80 percent, the study discovered.
The team, led by researchers from Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, found the tie to NuA4 in a meticulous process that studied thousands of yeast proteins to see which had an acetyl group stuck to them after NuA4 was added. During their work, the researchers also found that acetylation affects the enzyme Pck1p, another vital cog in how sugar is produced in yeast and, possibly, in human cells as well.
Pck1p, in turn, is also under the direction of Sir2, another enzyme that removes the acetyl group and which other studies have strongly link to the aging process and several diseases in mammals.
"Because the NuA4 complex is highly conserved among species, what we've found in yeast translates to humans as well," researcher Heng Zhu, a Johns Hopkins assistant professor of pharmacology and molecular sciences, said in a Hopkins news release. "What we've revealed about longevity in yeast perhaps someday can translate to human health."
The findings were published in the March 20 issue of Cell.
More information
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has more about healthy aging.
Showing posts with label anti-aging. Show all posts
Showing posts with label anti-aging. Show all posts
Monday, March 30, 2009
Friday, July 25, 2008
Why stress is aging?
Readers of Life Extension Update may recall the November 29, 2004 issue which described an association between emotional stress and shortened telomeres, a marker of cellular aging. Now, in research published in the May, 2008 issue of Brain, Behavior and Immunity, a team at the University of California, Los Angeles report that they may have discovered why.Telomeres are caps at the ends of chromosomes (the genetic material of the cell) that contribute to their stability. Each time a cell divides, telomeres lose length. Telomeres also lose length in response to chronic stress. Shortened telomeres in white blood cells known as lymphocytes have been associated with HIV, osteoporosis, heart disease and aging. An enzyme within the cell known as telomerase helps prevent telomere shortening and maintains the cells' ability to continue dividing.
For the current investigation, UCLA David Geffen School of Medicine professor of pathology and laboratory medicine Rita Effros and colleagues studied lymphocytes from healthy male and female donors between the ages of 25 and 55. The cells were treated with varying concentrations of cortisol, the hormone released by the body when under stress, or with DMSO (as a control). Continue Reading
More informations here:
- Live_blood Analysis
- Live_Blood_Analysis Darkfield Microscopy Courses
- dark field microscopy
- pleomorphism
- Günther Enderlein
more discussion: Forum· Addiction Forum · Ask the Doctors Forum · Ayurveda Forum · Ayurvedic & Thai Herbs Forum · Colon Cleansing Forum · Dental Forum · Diabetes Forum · Diet Forum · General Cleansing Forum · Hepatitis A, B. C Forum · Integrated Medicine Forum · Live Blood Analysis Forum · Ozone-Oxygen-Forum · pH - Alkaline - Acidity Forum · Weight Loss Forum
Oxy-Powder®$42.95  Top Quality Colon Cleansing |
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Brain food
In the July, 2008 issue of the journal Nature Reviews Neuroscience, UCLA professor of neurosurgery and physiological science Fernando Gómez-Pinilla summarizes the latest findings concerning the effects of various foods on the brain, noting that some foods have a drug-like effect. "Food is like a pharmaceutical compound that affects the brain," Dr Gómez-Pinilla stated."Diet, exercise and sleep have the potential to alter our brain health and mental function. This raises the exciting possibility that changes in diet are a viable strategy for enhancing cognitive abilities, protecting the brain from damage and counteracting the effects of aging."
In an analysis of over 160 studies, omega-3 fatty acids (EPA, DHA, and ALA) emerged as significant dietary compounds to enhance learning and memory, and prevent mental disorders. "Omega-3 fatty acids are essential for normal brain function,” Dr Gómez-Pinilla observed. “Dietary deficiency of omega-3 fatty acids in humans has been associated with increased risk of several mental disorders, including attention-deficit disorder, dyslexia, dementia, depression, bipolar disorder and schizophrenia. A deficiency of omega-3 fatty acids in rodents results in impaired learning and memory." Continue Reading
Sunday, July 13, 2008
Time to take on time
To significantly reduce disease, we must slow the aging process, according to a team of experts who published their conclusion online in the British Medical Journal on July 8. In an article entitled, “New model of health promotion and disease prevention for the 21st century,” Professor S. Jay Olshansky of the University of Illinois at Chicago and his associates suggest that the current focus on preventing and curing individual diseases will become outmoded as people in developed countries live longer and develop the multiple chronic illnesses that come with aging.“The change in strategy we are calling for requires a systematic attack on aging itself,” they write. “Evidence in models ranging from invertebrates to mammals suggests that all living things, including humans, possess biochemical mechanisms that influence how quickly we age and that they are adjustable.” Due to a greater life expectancy in developed countries, the increased incidence of diseases related to aging has resulted in a dramatic rise in health care costs. Dr Olshansky and colleagues note that if an extended life span is combined with health, it could result in a number of economic, social, and other benefits, which they call “the longevity dividend.” They propose increased funding for studies that will increase our knowledge concerning the relationship of aging to such diseases as type 2 diabetes, Parkinson's disease, and most cancers, in addition to research into the processes that control aging itself. Continue Reading
Monday, June 23, 2008
When Oxidants Can Increase Risk of Death
1. When Antioxidants Can Increase Risk of DeathThe truth about these nutrients - their benefits and risks
Antioxidants have long been considered good news, helping to reduce the 'oxidative' damage caused by everyday living that ages and eventually kills us. We are encouraged to eat foods (especially our 'five a day') that provide rich sources of antioxidant nutrients, and a massive market for antioxidant supplements has sprung up with literally thousands of studies to affirm their benefits.
But in the last few years, a number of big trials have apparently shown that taking extra antioxidants in the form of supplements doesn't work. They have reported that antioxidants, far from staving off the big killers such as cancer and heart disease, can actually make them worse. A recent review of a number of studies gave rise to media headlines such as "Antioxidants can kill".
So what is going on?
After numerous studies that showed extra antioxidants reduced risk of disease, some more recent research started to look at their effect on two particular 'at-risk' groups - people who smoked and those with cardiovascular disease.
Several of these trials showed that the risk of cancer in smokers increased slightly when they were given beta-carotene. Other studies suggested a small increased risk of heart attack in heart patients who were on medications such as statins and taking vitamin E.
What's interesting to note, however, is that far from putting the nail in the coffin of antioxidants, these studies give us an interesting insight into how these nutrients work - and why people who smoke or take statins are at risk, unless they adapt (rather than stop) their supplement intake.
For example, the recent Cochrane Review by Bjelakovic et al actually found that people who took BOTH multivitamin AND antioxidant supplements showed no increased risk, and in some cases, a significant decrease in risk. Now why should that be, and what does it tell us about the way antioxidants work?
I believe it points to a simple explanation as to why high-dose vitamin E increases cardiovascular risk, why beta-carotene increases smokers' risk, and why multivitamins eradicate this risk.
With this month's 100%health newsletter, I have produced a Special Report which looks in detail as these issues.
Find out:
. Why statins make high-dose vitamin E dangerous
. The nutrients that can reduce disease risk for smokers
. Why the Cochrane review is flawed
. The reactions to the review's findings from scientists whose studies were included
. The positive findings that went unreported
. And most importantly, what you can do to protect yourself - whether you're taking statins or smoking, are elderly or young, in good health or bad.
Click here to make sure you receive your copy.
My July newsletter also tackles the controversial issue of Childhood Vaccinations and looks at the evidence behind the guidelines so many parents are questioning.
I'll also be exploring the latest research into anti-ageing to bring you the best tips to help you turn the clock back and stay youthful.
And there's another Special Report on the plant compounds Salvestrols - a new discovery that could provide a major breakthrough in the prevention and treatment of cancer.
To ensure you receive all this - plus a whole range of exclusive member benefits - click here to join 100%health.
2. Two days is all it takes to change your life. Book now to qualify for Early Bird discounts
Learn how to build up your energy, control your weight and beat nagging problems that plague your health.
Our ever popular 100%health Weekend Workshop will give you manageable tools to combat the obstacles in your life that are holding you back. All you need is the desire and determination to transform your life. We do the rest by tailor-making a new life plan for you.
The next workshop is on 27th/28th September in London and I will spend two days taking you through a step-by-step guide to the eight key areas that will lead you to optimum health including information on the best foods to eat, why eating low-GL is best, cookery demonstrations and a personalised Health Action Plan. Plus a follow-up online health assessment to help you track your progress.
What you'll achieve
By the end of the weekend you will know exactly what you need to do to achieve the boundless energy, sharp mind, balanced mood, stable weight and glowing skin that are the hallmark of great health. We give you the tools to do it and the confidence to follow it through.
Book today and take the first step. I very much hope you will join me on the next 100%health Workshop in London on 27th/28th September. Places strictly limited - book your ticket now to qualify for the Early Bird discount of £50! Click here for more details and how to book.
Don't forget - if you're a member of 100%health you'll automatically save a further £30 on your booking - click here to join.
3. Are you interested in becoming a nutritional therapist?
The Institute for Optimum Nutrition offers a 3-year part time foundation science degree in nutritional therapy.
If you are interested in studying nutrition to qualify as a nutritional therapist , the Institute for Optimum Nutrition have asked me to let you know there are still some places available on their excellent course commencing this September. To find out more book your place on one of the remaining open days see the ION website for more details: http://www.ion.ac.uk/open_days.htm
Wishing you the best of health,
Patrick Holford
Antioxidants have long been considered good news, helping to reduce the 'oxidative' damage caused by everyday living that ages and eventually kills us. We are encouraged to eat foods (especially our 'five a day') that provide rich sources of antioxidant nutrients, and a massive market for antioxidant supplements has sprung up with literally thousands of studies to affirm their benefits.
But in the last few years, a number of big trials have apparently shown that taking extra antioxidants in the form of supplements doesn't work. They have reported that antioxidants, far from staving off the big killers such as cancer and heart disease, can actually make them worse. A recent review of a number of studies gave rise to media headlines such as "Antioxidants can kill".
So what is going on?
After numerous studies that showed extra antioxidants reduced risk of disease, some more recent research started to look at their effect on two particular 'at-risk' groups - people who smoked and those with cardiovascular disease.
Several of these trials showed that the risk of cancer in smokers increased slightly when they were given beta-carotene. Other studies suggested a small increased risk of heart attack in heart patients who were on medications such as statins and taking vitamin E.
What's interesting to note, however, is that far from putting the nail in the coffin of antioxidants, these studies give us an interesting insight into how these nutrients work - and why people who smoke or take statins are at risk, unless they adapt (rather than stop) their supplement intake.
For example, the recent Cochrane Review by Bjelakovic et al actually found that people who took BOTH multivitamin AND antioxidant supplements showed no increased risk, and in some cases, a significant decrease in risk. Now why should that be, and what does it tell us about the way antioxidants work?
I believe it points to a simple explanation as to why high-dose vitamin E increases cardiovascular risk, why beta-carotene increases smokers' risk, and why multivitamins eradicate this risk.
With this month's 100%health newsletter, I have produced a Special Report which looks in detail as these issues.
Find out:
. Why statins make high-dose vitamin E dangerous
. The nutrients that can reduce disease risk for smokers
. Why the Cochrane review is flawed
. The reactions to the review's findings from scientists whose studies were included
. The positive findings that went unreported
. And most importantly, what you can do to protect yourself - whether you're taking statins or smoking, are elderly or young, in good health or bad.
Click here to make sure you receive your copy.
My July newsletter also tackles the controversial issue of Childhood Vaccinations and looks at the evidence behind the guidelines so many parents are questioning.
I'll also be exploring the latest research into anti-ageing to bring you the best tips to help you turn the clock back and stay youthful.
And there's another Special Report on the plant compounds Salvestrols - a new discovery that could provide a major breakthrough in the prevention and treatment of cancer.
To ensure you receive all this - plus a whole range of exclusive member benefits - click here to join 100%health.
2. Two days is all it takes to change your life. Book now to qualify for Early Bird discounts
Learn how to build up your energy, control your weight and beat nagging problems that plague your health.
Our ever popular 100%health Weekend Workshop will give you manageable tools to combat the obstacles in your life that are holding you back. All you need is the desire and determination to transform your life. We do the rest by tailor-making a new life plan for you.
The next workshop is on 27th/28th September in London and I will spend two days taking you through a step-by-step guide to the eight key areas that will lead you to optimum health including information on the best foods to eat, why eating low-GL is best, cookery demonstrations and a personalised Health Action Plan. Plus a follow-up online health assessment to help you track your progress.
What you'll achieve
By the end of the weekend you will know exactly what you need to do to achieve the boundless energy, sharp mind, balanced mood, stable weight and glowing skin that are the hallmark of great health. We give you the tools to do it and the confidence to follow it through.
Book today and take the first step. I very much hope you will join me on the next 100%health Workshop in London on 27th/28th September. Places strictly limited - book your ticket now to qualify for the Early Bird discount of £50! Click here for more details and how to book.
Don't forget - if you're a member of 100%health you'll automatically save a further £30 on your booking - click here to join.
3. Are you interested in becoming a nutritional therapist?
The Institute for Optimum Nutrition offers a 3-year part time foundation science degree in nutritional therapy.
If you are interested in studying nutrition to qualify as a nutritional therapist , the Institute for Optimum Nutrition have asked me to let you know there are still some places available on their excellent course commencing this September. To find out more book your place on one of the remaining open days see the ION website for more details: http://www.ion.ac.uk/open_days.htm
Wishing you the best of health,
Patrick Holford
Tuesday, April 1, 2008
Vitamin C Fights Heart Disease
Millions die each year from heart disease and stroke, and the overwhelming evidence is that vitamin C supplementation would save many lives.Two-time Nobel Prize winner Dr. Linus Pauling estimated that the rate of heart disease would be reduced by 80 per cent if adults in the US supplemented with 2,000 to 3,000 mg of vitamin C each day. According to Dr. Pauling, "Since vitamin C deficiency is the common cause of human heart disease, vitamin C supplementation is the universal treatment for this disease."[1] Heart disease is the number one killer in the US. For those with existing heart disease Dr. Pauling said that blockage of heart arteries could actually be reversed by supplementing with 6,000 of vitamin C and 6,000 of lysine (a common amino acid) taken in divided doses throughout the day. Vitamin C supplementation both lowers serum cholesterol levels and repairs lesions of arterial walls. 1998 Nobel Prize winner Dr. Louis J. Ignarro found that supplementing with vitamin C and vitamin E significantly reduces the risk of developing arteriosclerosis.[2]
A study examined vitamin E and vitamin C supplement use in relation to mortality risk in 11,178 persons aged 67-105 who participated in the Established Populations for Epidemiologic Studies of the Elderly over a nine year period.[3] Simultaneous use of vitamins E and C was associated with a lower risk of total mortality and coronary mortality after adjusting for alcohol use, smoking history, aspirin use, and medical conditions.
A landmark study following over 85,000 nurses over a 16-year period for a total of 1,240,000 person-years found that vitamin C supplementation significantly reduced the risk of heart disease.[4] Intake of vitamin C from foods alone was insufficient to significantly effect the rate of heart disease. High quantities of vitamin C from supplements was essential to provide the protective effects. The study adjusted for age, smoking, and a variety of other coronary risk factors.
An international team pooled data from nine prospective studies of 293,000 people that included information on intakes of vitamin E, carotenoids, and vitamin C, with a 10-year follow-up to check for major incident coronary heart disease events in people without disease when the study began. Dietary intake of antioxidant vitamins was only weakly related to a reduced coronary heart disease risk. However, subjects who took as little as 700 mg of vitamin C daily in supplement form reduced their risk of heart disease events by 25 per cent compared to those who took no supplements. [5] Read the full story>>
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Vitamins Cure Skin Conditions
(OMNS Jan 23, 2008) Skin troubles are a common, often painful problem. Topical applications of vitamin E, and/or vitamin C and niacin provide rapid relief. The first reports indicating that vitamin E, and concentrated topical and IV solutions of vitamin C were a highly effective treatment for burns surfaced over 50 years ago. Vitamins may be used to treat both thermal burns and sun burns, as well as wrinkles, pigmentation, scrapes, bug bites, and even bed sores.
Foods alone do not provide sufficient vitamins to provide maximum healing. Vitamins also provide protection against skin-aging damage caused by exposure to the sun. The benefits of vitamin C and niacin have been proven in numerous controlled clinical trials using high potency vitamin C and niacin creams. [1-9] The scientific literature contains at least 29 reports published since 2003 using niacin creams and 8 using vitamin C creams. Even before the Korean War, orthomolecular physicians were reporting topical vitamin E to be a superior treatment for burns. [10] Recent research conforms this. [11, 12] Read the full story >>
Foods alone do not provide sufficient vitamins to provide maximum healing. Vitamins also provide protection against skin-aging damage caused by exposure to the sun. The benefits of vitamin C and niacin have been proven in numerous controlled clinical trials using high potency vitamin C and niacin creams. [1-9] The scientific literature contains at least 29 reports published since 2003 using niacin creams and 8 using vitamin C creams. Even before the Korean War, orthomolecular physicians were reporting topical vitamin E to be a superior treatment for burns. [10] Recent research conforms this. [11, 12] Read the full story >>
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Prenatal vitamins shown to reduce children's risk of cancer
M.T. Whitney Key concepts: folic acid, vitamins and prenatal vitamins(NaturalNews) Taking folic acid and multivitamins while pregnant can nearly halve the chance of a child getting a common cancer before the age of 18, new evidence from a Toronto children's hospital shows.
The study, from Toronto's Hospital for Sick Children, was spurred when officials at the hospital noticed a drop in neuroblastomas five years ago, after the Canadian government started requiring flour manufacturers to add folic acid to their product in 1998.
What you need to know
• Folic acid and multivitamins were shown to lower the chance of leukemia in children by 39 percent.
• The same one-two punch can lower the risk of a child developing a brain tumor by 27 percent.
• The risk of a child getting a neuroblastoma, which attacks the nervous system, was lowered by 49 percent.
• For spina bifida, a spinal condition, the risk is lowered by 80 percent with folic acid supplements.
• Most folic acid supplements, easily found for just pennies a day, will give you between 600 and 1,000 milligrams for the day, more than the government-recommended 400 milligrams.
• Only 40 percent of Canadian mothers take the right amount of folic acid supplements during pregnancy, Dr. Gideon Koren, the study's principal investigator, told The Toronto Star.
• The study was published in the journal Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics (February, 2007).
• "To our amazement and surprise, all available studies today from different parts of the world ... showed a similar trend (to the one in Ontario)," Koren told the Toronto Star.
Sadly, most doctors and hospitals still don't teach nutrition to patients, and expectant mothers are rarely told about the multitude of health benefits derived from nutrients like folic acid or vitamin D. The current message on folic acid supplementation focuses solely on spina bifida and fails to mention the vitamin's anti-cancer effects.
Bottom line
• Mothers who take folic acid and prenatal vitamins may reduce risk of cancer in their children.
What you need to know
• Folic acid and multivitamins were shown to lower the chance of leukemia in children by 39 percent.
• The same one-two punch can lower the risk of a child developing a brain tumor by 27 percent.
• The risk of a child getting a neuroblastoma, which attacks the nervous system, was lowered by 49 percent.
• For spina bifida, a spinal condition, the risk is lowered by 80 percent with folic acid supplements.
• Most folic acid supplements, easily found for just pennies a day, will give you between 600 and 1,000 milligrams for the day, more than the government-recommended 400 milligrams.
• Only 40 percent of Canadian mothers take the right amount of folic acid supplements during pregnancy, Dr. Gideon Koren, the study's principal investigator, told The Toronto Star.
• The study was published in the journal Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics (February, 2007).
• "To our amazement and surprise, all available studies today from different parts of the world ... showed a similar trend (to the one in Ontario)," Koren told the Toronto Star.
Sadly, most doctors and hospitals still don't teach nutrition to patients, and expectant mothers are rarely told about the multitude of health benefits derived from nutrients like folic acid or vitamin D. The current message on folic acid supplementation focuses solely on spina bifida and fails to mention the vitamin's anti-cancer effects.
Bottom line
• Mothers who take folic acid and prenatal vitamins may reduce risk of cancer in their children.
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Magnesium May Lower Risk for Some Strokes in Male Smokers
(HealthDay News) -- Increased consumption of magnesium-rich foods such as whole grains may reduce male smokers' risk of cerebral infarction, which occurs when blood flow to the brain is blocked, a new Swedish study suggests.
Researchers at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm analyzed the diets and other health/lifestyle habits and characteristics of 26,556 Finnish men, aged 50 to 69, who smoked but had never had a stroke. During an average of 13.6 years of follow-up, 2,702 of the men had cerebral infarctions, 383 had intracerebral hemorrhages (bleeding into the brain tissue), 196 had subarachnoid hemorrhages (bleeding between the brain and the tissues that cover it), and 84 had unspecified types of strokes.
After they adjusted for age and cardiovascular risk factors (such as diabetes and cholesterol levels), the researchers concluded that men who consumed the most magnesium (an average of 589 milligrams per day) had a 15 percent lower risk for cerebral infarction than those who consumed the least amount of magnesium (an average of 373 milligrams per day). The association was stronger in men younger than 60.
There was no association between magnesium consumption and risk for intracerebral or subarachnoid hemorrhage, said the researchers, who added that calcium, potassium and sodium intake weren't associated with risk for any type of stroke.
The findings were published in the March 10 issue of the Archives of Internal Medicine.
"An inverse association between magnesium intake and cerebral infarction is biologically plausible," the study authors wrote. Magnesium lowers blood pressure and may also affect cholesterol concentrations and the body's use of insulin to turn glucose into energy, both of which would affect the risk for cerebral infarction, but not hemorrhage.
"Whether magnesium supplementation lowers the risk of cerebral infarction needs to be assessed in large, long-term randomized trials," the study authors added.
Recent studies have suggested that changes in diet may help reduce stroke risk, according to background information in the study. High blood pressure is a risk factor for stroke, which means that dietary changes that lower blood pressure may reduce stroke risk.
More information
The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke outlines ways to prevent stroke.
Researchers at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm analyzed the diets and other health/lifestyle habits and characteristics of 26,556 Finnish men, aged 50 to 69, who smoked but had never had a stroke. During an average of 13.6 years of follow-up, 2,702 of the men had cerebral infarctions, 383 had intracerebral hemorrhages (bleeding into the brain tissue), 196 had subarachnoid hemorrhages (bleeding between the brain and the tissues that cover it), and 84 had unspecified types of strokes.
After they adjusted for age and cardiovascular risk factors (such as diabetes and cholesterol levels), the researchers concluded that men who consumed the most magnesium (an average of 589 milligrams per day) had a 15 percent lower risk for cerebral infarction than those who consumed the least amount of magnesium (an average of 373 milligrams per day). The association was stronger in men younger than 60.
There was no association between magnesium consumption and risk for intracerebral or subarachnoid hemorrhage, said the researchers, who added that calcium, potassium and sodium intake weren't associated with risk for any type of stroke.
The findings were published in the March 10 issue of the Archives of Internal Medicine.
"An inverse association between magnesium intake and cerebral infarction is biologically plausible," the study authors wrote. Magnesium lowers blood pressure and may also affect cholesterol concentrations and the body's use of insulin to turn glucose into energy, both of which would affect the risk for cerebral infarction, but not hemorrhage.
"Whether magnesium supplementation lowers the risk of cerebral infarction needs to be assessed in large, long-term randomized trials," the study authors added.
Recent studies have suggested that changes in diet may help reduce stroke risk, according to background information in the study. High blood pressure is a risk factor for stroke, which means that dietary changes that lower blood pressure may reduce stroke risk.
More information
The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke outlines ways to prevent stroke.
Thursday, March 6, 2008
ORTHOMOLECULAR MEDICINE NEWS SERVICE
"It is a matter of common knowledge that any processing that foods undergo serves to make them more harmful than unprocessed foods." (McDonald's Corporation legal statement, shown in the documentary "Supersize Me")
The DOCTOR YOURSELF NEWSLETTER (Vol. 5, No. 2 for January 5, 2005)
"Free of charge, free of advertising, and free of the A.M.A." Written and copyright 2004 by Andrew W. Saul of http://www.doctoryourself.com/ , which welcomes 1.5 million visitors
annually. Commercial use of the website or the contents of this Newsletter is strictly prohibited.
ORTHOMOLECULAR MEDICINE NEWS SERVICE
My long-time readers have likely taken notice that the DOCTOR YOURSELF Newsletter is now a monthly. Yes, after five years of twice- monthly publication, I am giving a nod to the reality of some 30,000 hits a day at the http://www.doctoryourself.com/ website. There is only so much
time in a day.
The good news: I will continue to assail your ears about every four weeks or so with my edifying editorials and health hints. And, there is still NO CHARGE for the Newsletter. (To subscribe to the Doctor Yourself Newsletter:
newsletter-subscribe@doctoryourself.com )
Here's the really good news: With my copious new free time, I am beginning another project: the ORTHOMOLECULAR MEDICINE NEWS SERVICE. Like the Associated Press or Reuters, OMNS is a wire-service style news feed directed to members of the press, radio and TV news
media.
We have authoritative scientific clout and plan to use it. The OMNS editorial board consists of:
Abram Hoffer, M.D.
Hugh D. Riordan, M.D.
Harold Foster, Ph.D.
Bradford Weeks, M.D.
I see the creation of the Orthomolecular Medicine News Service as an increasingly necessary step to counter the pharmaceutically-biased factoids and vitamin misinformation that the media seem ever so ready to accept uncritically. The recent allegedly-negative E and C studies bear this out. (http://www.doctoryourself.com/safety.html/ )
Now with many hundreds of media email addresses, both newspaper and TV, we will shortly go ahead with a mass e-mail press release and inaugural announcement.
YES, YOU TOO MAY SUBSCRIBE TO THE ORTHOMOLECULAR NEWS SERVICE, free of charge. To do so, you will need to promptly send a blank email to omns-subscribe@doctoryourself.com . (Requests to other addresses, such as my regular email address, will not be processed.)
ASCORBATE: THE SCIENCE OF VITAMIN C
"It's not what we don't know that harms us, but what we do know that ain't so." (Eubie Blake, 1883-1983)
What is it about a little left-handed molecule of six carbons, six oxygens, and eight hydrogens that ticks off so many in the medical community? Maybe it's cases like this one: Ray, a health professional I know, had an 11-month old son who was very sick for over a week. No one, and I mean no one, in their family had had any sleep in a long time.
They were up night after night with this child, who had a high fever, glazed watery eyes, tons of thick watery mucus and labored breathing. The child would not sleep, and did little else but cry. The baby was under the care of a pediatrician, who, in the infant's eleven months on earth, had already prescribed twelve rounds of some very serious antibiotics. That they clearly were not working was all too apparent to Ray, who out of desperation decided to try something he previously had been taught to not try: bowel tolerance quantities of oral ascorbate.
Ray and his wife gave their baby some vitamin C about every 15 minutes. As a result, the baby
was noticeably improved in a matter of hours, and slept through the night. With frequent doses continuing, the child was completely well in 48 hours. Ray calculated that the baby had received just over 2,000 mg vitamin C per kilogram body weight per day. This is even more than what Dr. Frederick Robert Klenner customarily ordered for sick patients. Remarkably, at 20,000 milligrams of vitamin C/day, that 20-pound baby never had diarrhea. With such a little body, you have to marvel at where all of it was going. Of course, it is the opinion of those who promulgate the US RDA and related nutritional mythology that almost all of that baby's vitamin C went uselessly into the toilet. Ray and his wife would tell you differently. They would say
that their sick child soaked it up like a sponge, and then promptly got better.
For the layman unable to obtain intravenous vitamin C, one of the most important parts of Hickey and Roberts' new book, Ascorbate: The Science of Vitamin C, is its attention to oral administration, divided dosing, absorption, and vitamin C retention time in the bloodstream. With simple graphs and uncomplicated language, the authors illustrate 1) how high oral
doses of vitamin C yield higher blood levels of the vitamin, and 2) how dividing the oral doses maintains those higher levels. Although initially seeming almost too obvious to mention, these are not self-evident concepts. Government-based intake standards such as the RDA hinge on
ignoring them.
Hickey and Roberts zero in on this serious public health error. Their critical analysis of research studies purporting to justify a mere 100 or 200 mg/day ascorbate dose is worthy of Linus Pauling himself. Dr. Roberts says: "Stressed and even mildly ill people can tolerate 1,000 times more vitamin C, implying a change in biochemistry that was ignored in creating the
RDA. The RDA concept does not differentiate between short and long- term effects of deprivation.
The possibility that sub-clinical scurvy causes chronic disease has enormous implications for health. In setting the RDA, unsubstantiated risks of taking too much vitamin C have been accorded great importance, whereas the risks of not taking enough have been ignored. Real scientists understand that 'no scientific proof' is a fancy way of saying 'we don’t like this idea.' Furthermore, there is no clear mechanism for the RDA to be modified when new scientific evidence emerges."
Ascorbate: The Science of Vitamin C is a compellingly written, fast-paced inspection of belief-based bias that permeates the scientific method. It is not a tirade; Hickey and Roberts simply tell it the way it is. They are well qualified to do so. Steve Hickey has a PhD in Medical Biophysics from the University of Manchester, and spent about ten years in research at the
Manchester Medical School and associated hospitals. Interestingly, he had initially trained as a biologist specializing in pharmacology, later switching to biomechanics and medical physics. In addition to degrees in physiology and computer science, Hilary Roberts' University of Manchester PhD was on the effects of early life malnutrition. She spent ten years in research
and teaching at the university.
When asked how he and his coauthor came to write the book, Dr. Hickey said: "Since Linus Pauling's death, there seemed to be a great deal of misinformation. The NIH had performed some questionable experiments and were making the apparently ridiculous statement that blood plasma and tissues became saturated with low doses of vitamin C. There was no mainstream research on high doses and the establishment was making wild extrapolations from their low dose data. We could not see how a clinical trial with 200 mg of vitamin C, for example, could be used to suggest that higher doses were not effective. The work of physicians like Robert Cathcart, Archie Kalokerinos and Abram Hoffer intrigued us. The reported effects, especially of intravenous vitamin C, were astounding. It was difficult to find any reason to explain the lack of scientific follow-up. We had friends and relatives that were sick or dying from diseases that
high dose vitamin C was claimed to cure. Eventually we felt we had no choice but to write the book."
Dr. Roberts adds: "Most RDA standards are based on data which was not measured in actual experiments on real people. Even the small amount of data from the 19–30 year old subjects, who were measured, is based on neutrophils, a white blood cell type that is known to have unusual vitamin C biochemistry, along with an exceptional ability to pump the vitamin into
itself. Neutrophils have ascorbate levels from 25-60 times that of the surrounding plasma. This cell type is not a reliable model for the whole body."
Additional topics discussed in Ascorbate: The Science of Vitamin C include infectious disease, oxidation and illness, the safety of vitamin C, and a presentation of the authors' dynamic flow model of continual vitamin C-mediated tissue reduction. The book contains substantial sections
devoted to cardiovascular disease, with the welcome inclusion of an efficient discussion of the roles of vitamin E and lysine. Two excellent chapters on cancer take the starch right out of the Mayo Clinic "refutations" of the Pauling/Cameron vitamin C studies. The authors state that Dr.
Charles "Moertel's switch to oral does would clearly have biased the results" even though Pauling "stated clearly that intravenous doses are more effective than oral doses and explained the reasons for the difference."
Ascorbate: The Science of Vitamin C contains 575 references, and especially good ones. Though not alphabetized, all are keyed to the text with numbered footnotes. For a book this important, the index could be and should be more detailed. A glossary is included for the general reader.
All will enjoy the well-selected epigrams that form the chapter lead-in quotes.
The authors expert command of their topic has enabled them to successfully encompass an enormous, and enormously important, subject. To make a 216-page book this comprehensive, and also so exceptionally comprehensible as well, is no small achievement.
I wish I'd had a book of this caliber back in the 1970's when my kids were infants. I raised my children all the way into college without a single dose of any antiviral, antihistamine, or antibiotic. What they did get were megadoses of vitamin C. We, like so many other parents, learned the
principles of vitamin C therapy (quantity, frequency, and duration) at our kids' bedsides at three in the morning. Now, the pioneering work of megascorbate orthomolecular physicians has been concisely summarized and very skillfully explained in Ascorbate: The Science of Vitamin C. It is a thorough, up to date and very readable analysis of what, to some, may still appear to be a controversial topic.
Those who use it know that taking enough C results in three C's: patient comfort, low cost, and parental control. Without necessitating the use of invasive technology, nor the trauma of hospitalization, parents can regain confidence and mastery over illness to a degree that they might never have thought possible. For this reason, vitamin C therapy will, at least in
some quarters, continue be decried and denounced as irresponsible. It takes some real ego strength for a parent to stand firm and say, "This is what I am going to do: I am going to follow the Klenner/Pauling/Cathcart vitamin C protocol." Hickey and Roberts' review of vitamin C research is a solid buttress that makes such a stance possible. No bias or belief system
can withstand their first-rate presentation of the safety and effectiveness of megadoses of ascorbate.
Hickey S and Roberts H. Ascorbate: The science of vitamin C. 2004. ISBN 1-4116-0724-4. Morrisville, NC: Lulu.com. www.lulu.com/ascorbate NEW REVIEW of DOCTOR YOURSELF: Natural Healing that Works "Take Charge of Your Own Health"
Review by Beatrice Trum Hunter, in the Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients
Several recently published books deal with subjects that emphasize the importance of an individual taking charge of health practices and decisions. . . The illnesses and health problems discussed in Doctor Yourself: Natural Healing that Works are presented in alphabetical order,
and include acid reflux, allergies, hemorrhoids, sleep disorders, and vaccinations, among many others. According to Andrew Saul, many diseases can be treated with safe, inexpensive, and drugless approaches. He writes conversationally, interspersing protocols with personal
experiences and case stories. Take psoriasis, an intractable condition. Try a complete change of diet, with fresh foods, vegetable juices, lecithin, and vitamins including extra vitamin D, instead of the palliative ointments and lotions. For additional information on the scientific studies supporting the protocols. Dr. Saul refers readers to DoctorYourself.com website with
more than 4000 references.
Doctor Yourself: Natural Healing that Works, by Andrew, Saul, PhD.
(oversized quality paperback, 241 pages, bibliography, index, 2003) [from the Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients, #253-254, May 2004, p 132. http://www.townsendletter.com/ / Telephone (360)385-6021.] Editor's Note: This particular review was a special treat for me. Beatrice Trum Hunter's NATURAL FOODS COOKBOOK (New York: Pyramid, 1961) was one of the very first health books I read. (It is reviewed at http://www.hoboes.com/html/Diner/revue/naturalfoods.shtml) I was therefore most honored to have made her list of recommended books. Incidentally, the Townsend Letter also very favorably reviewed Doctor Yourself in the Aug-Sept 2004 issue. The review is posted at
http://www.doctoryourself.com/townsend.html . Additional reviews of my book are posted at http://www.doctoryourself.com/saulbooks.html/
TO ORDER AN AUTOGRAPHED COPY of DOCTOR YOURSELF:
Natural Healing that Works, please go to http://www.doctoryourself.com/order.html/
FREE ANTIVIRUS SOFTWARE
There is no longer any excuse to not have the latest and most recent, and
I mean this morning's, antivirus protection. With AVG Free Edition
Antivirus software, such protection is free and updates are, too. I have
used this excellent, downloadable, and totally free of charge program for
years:
http://free.grisoft.com/freeweb.php/doc/2/
(You can also go to http://www.grisoft.com )
FIRM FLUORIDE FACTS
Please especially note the sources of these statements.
"THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT FLUORIDE IS AN ESSENTIAL
NUTRIENT FOR HUMANS." (Physicians' Desk Reference)
http://www.pdrhealth.com/drug_info/nmdrugprofiles/nutsupdrugs/flu_0109.shtml
FLUORIDE IS NOT APPROVED BY THE U.S. FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION http://www.cm-life.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2004/12/06/41b3e6ab68a3c
("CITY REMOVES FLUORIDE FROM WATER. The City of Mount Pleasant (Michigan) followed the will of its resident-voters and began removing fluoride from its water supply. . . (City) ordinance states anything added to the city water must be approved by the Food and Drug
Administration, and fluoride is not.")
FLUORIDE DOES NOT WORK
California is 28% fluoridated; Hawaii is 9% fluoridated. These states are tied for the lowest rate of tooth loss in the USA. On the other hand, Kentucky is 100% fluoridated and has the highest toothless population of older adults.
(http://www.latimes.com/features/health/medicine/la-me-health2jan02,1,2990789.story?coll=la-health-medicine)
CORRECTION: My review of Pottenger's Cats, in the December, 2004 Newsletter (posted at http://www.doctoryourself.com/news/v5n1.txt ) omitted rightful mention of the Selene River Press (http://www.seleneriverpress.com/), publisher and distributor of health books.
They kindly provided me with the review copy of Pottenger's Cats.
VITAMIN E WITCH HUNT
by Michael Fumento
http://www.fumento.com/nutr/vitamine.html
Less than two months ago I debunked a report in the Lancet medical journal claiming antioxidants slightly increase your chance of dying, rather than reducing it as most researchers believe. Now I'm writing about a report that says the same thing about a specific antioxidant, vitamin E. Why are these pills being persecuted? Among the similarities of the earlier report and this one, authored by researchers at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, is that the mainstream media accepted both without question. Both times the researchers smugly declared their work to be the final word on the subject, though both reports were, as the vitamin E one
admitted, 'a qualitative departure from previous findings.'
Since a good scientist knows no single report ever proves anything, we know these weren't good scientists. In fact, they have less in common with Johns Hopkins than Matthew Hopkins - England's infamous 'Witch-finder General.'
Consider the vitamin E paper, published in The Annals of Internal Medicine (full citation at http://www.doctoryourself.com/safety.html ). It analyzed 19 clinical trials between 1993 and 2004, involving 136,000 people in all. These were combined into what's called a 'meta-analysis,'
which showed no overall increase in deaths. But at high levels, defined as above 400 international units (IUs) per day, the researchers insisted 'vitamin E supplements may increase (deaths) and should be avoided.'
A glaring problem with the report is that there have been far more than 19 vitamin E trials since 1993, and one way the pack was whittled down was by excluding all studies reporting fewer than 10 deaths. The witch-hunters weren't about to interrogate witnesses who might keep the accused from a visit to the gallows.
Also, if 'more is worse,' why did the two studies that used the highest dose, 2,000 IUs per day, indicate fewer deaths among vitamin E users? Another problem with declaring this report to be the final word on vitamin E is that while clinical trials are important, epidemiological studies cannot be ignored. Yet ignored they were.
Thus there was no reference to the 1996 one from the National Institute of Aging that followed 11,000 elderly persons for seven years and found that the death rate for vitamin E users was a third that of non-users. Adding another antioxidant, vitamin C, cut fatalities even more.
A 1993 Harvard study of 40,000 male health professionals found those who took at least 100 IUs daily for two years had a third fewer cases of heart disease than those receiving no vitamin E supplements.
A Harvard study of 87,000 nurses that year found an even greater reduction in heart disease when comparing women who took the highest amount of vitamin E vs. those taking the lowest amount. Does this have you running in terror at the sight of a vitamin E capsule?
But what's with the supplement witch-hunt? Why the reports of vitamin E flying on broomsticks, and beta carotene casting hexes? "Unfortunately, there are some doctors who are biased against dietary supplements," says John Hathcock, vice president of Scientific & International Affairs at the D.C.-based Council for Responsible Nutrition. To an extent, this is understandable. For one, some supplements are worthless while a few have proved harmful. But you just can't lump 'eye of newt' in together with vitamin E or other antioxidants.
Mainstream medicine is also biased toward that which has formal FDA approval. You know, like Vioxx. And never mind the many supplements such as iron and iodine that have tacit FDA support but no formal approval.
Some doctors also fret that people will try to substitute supplements for good eating habits. 'We don't think that people need to take vitamin E supplements, that they get enough from the diet,' said the lead vitamin E prosecutor, associate professor Edgar Miller.
Yet the average American gets only about 10 IU daily. With some studies showing 2,000 IUs to be beneficial, dietary intake leaves us a bit shy of the mark. Anyway, those taking vitamins and other supplements also have the best diets.
The final explanation for vitamin-pill persecution is that medical journals are becoming increasingly sensationalist. Publishing articles contrary to popular wisdom is a cheap and easy way to get headlines. But there's no excuse for throwing a noose around the neck of good
science and healthful products.
[Reprinted with the kind permission of the author. Michael Fumento http://www.fumento.com/) is a senior fellow at Hudson Institute, syndicated columnist with Scripps Howard News Service and author of BioEvolution: How Biotechnology is Changing our World.]
The GERSON THERAPY MOVIE IS NOW ONLINE!
If you've been wanting to watch THE GERSON MIRACLE ever since I reviewed it the July 20 Doctor Yourself Newsletter (http://www.doctoryourself.com/gersontherapy2.html or http://www.doctoryourself.com/news/v4n16.txt), you are in luck. The entire movie, or any specific chapter you like, can now be viewed FREE OF CHARGE at www.gersonmiracle.org/movie.html . Grab some unsalted popcorn and pull up a chair.
BOOK REVIEW:
FAST FOOD NATION: The Dark Side of the All-American Meal, by Eric
Schlosser.
Boston : Houghton Mifflin, 2001. ISBN: 0395977894
Why, why, why are so many, many, many people so sick, sick, sick? The main reason is staring right back at them from their dinner. It's the junk food, people. An ever-increasing proportion of our food is fast food. "In 1970, Americans spent about $6 billion on fast food; in 2000, they spent more than $110 billion," writes Eric Schlosser in his book Fast Food Nation. "They spend more on fast food than on movies, books, magazines, newspapers, videos, and recorded music - combined. . . On any given day in the United States, about one-quarter of the adult population visits a fast food restaurant." (p 3)
What does this mean to our health? Everything. Fast food is a high- additive, high-fat, high-meat, high-sugar, and high-salt diet. And what's just as bad, it's a low-fiber, low vitamin, low mineral diet to boot. Fast food is exactly the wrong way to eat.
And we are teaching our kids just how to do it . . .wrong. Chapter 2 discusses how the fast-food industry sells to kids, especially in schools. This is the last thing we need; a typical teenage boy already drinks 20 oz of soda a day. Indoctrination starts early: page 30 of Fast Food Nation shows a superb photo of Ronald McDonald speaking to a large room full of enraptured elementary schoolchildren. How can this be?
Because the cafeterias in so many of our school districts are for sale for the right price. The actual franchise income that any school district may get pales when compared to what fast food industry takes in. After all, says Schlosser, "A medium Coke that sells for $1.29 contains roughly 9 cents' worth of syrup."
Adults are to blame. We, not our kids, are the ones who allowed fast food in our schools. We are the ones who let Harlem Memorial Hospital contain its very own McDonald's. It is our money that enables McDonald's to open FIVE new restaurants every DAY. It is our U.S. Federal Communications Commission and our U.S. Federal Trade Commission that permit every American child to watch 10,000 television food ads every year. Are these ads for carrots? Not according to Yale professor Kelly Brownell, PhD., who says that 95% of TV food commercials promote candy, soft drinks and fast food.
Fast Food Nation is much more than a history of soda pop and the flipped burger. In Chapter 3, Schlosser takes us "Behind the Counter" to examine labor issues in the fast food biz. "No other industry in the United States has a workforce so dominated by adolescents," he writes. And teenagers work hard and they work cheap. Too cheap. "Increasing the federal minimum wage by a dollar (an hour) would add about two cents to the cost of a fast food hamburger." Fast Food Nations also explores "Why the Fries Taste Good" in Chapter 5, as well as the very real dangers for those who work at meat packing factories.
Your making a point to read the exceptionally well-written Fast Food Nation would be the perfect New Year's resolution. Here is some video encouragement to help you on your way as you change your lifestyle and fight to eat right:
DIET WARS
"Nobody ever got rich marketing self-control." That is my favorite quote from "Diet Wars," a recent PBS' Frontline presentation. If you missed this truly excellent program, you can still watch it online, for free, at
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/diet/view/
Privacy Statement:
We do not sell, and we do not share, our mailing list or your email address with anyone. We never send out advertisements of any kind. You may notice that there is no advertising at http://doctoryourself.com and no advertising in this newsletter. We have no financial connection with the supplement industry. We do not sell vitamins or other health products, except for Dr. Saul's books, which help fund these free public services.
AN IMPORTANT NOTE: This newsletter is not in any way offered as prescription, diagnosis nor treatment for any disease, illness, infirmity or physical condition. Any form of self-treatment or alternative health program
necessarily must involve an individual's acceptance of some risk, and no one should assume otherwise. Persons needing medical care should obtain it from a physician. Consult your doctor before making any health decision.
"DOCTOR YOURSELF" "DoctorYourself.com" and "Doctor Yourself Newsletter" are service marks of Andrew W. Saul. All rights reserved.
Copyright c 2005 and prior years Andrew W. Saul drsaul@doctoryourself.com . Permission to reproduce single copies of this newsletter FOR NON-COMMERCIAL, PERSONAL USE ONLY is hereby granted providing no alteration of content is made and authorship credit is
given.
The DOCTOR YOURSELF NEWSLETTER (Vol. 5, No. 2 for January 5, 2005)
"Free of charge, free of advertising, and free of the A.M.A." Written and copyright 2004 by Andrew W. Saul of http://www.doctoryourself.com/ , which welcomes 1.5 million visitors
annually. Commercial use of the website or the contents of this Newsletter is strictly prohibited.
ORTHOMOLECULAR MEDICINE NEWS SERVICE
My long-time readers have likely taken notice that the DOCTOR YOURSELF Newsletter is now a monthly. Yes, after five years of twice- monthly publication, I am giving a nod to the reality of some 30,000 hits a day at the http://www.doctoryourself.com/ website. There is only so much
time in a day.
The good news: I will continue to assail your ears about every four weeks or so with my edifying editorials and health hints. And, there is still NO CHARGE for the Newsletter. (To subscribe to the Doctor Yourself Newsletter:
newsletter-subscribe@doctoryourself.com )
Here's the really good news: With my copious new free time, I am beginning another project: the ORTHOMOLECULAR MEDICINE NEWS SERVICE. Like the Associated Press or Reuters, OMNS is a wire-service style news feed directed to members of the press, radio and TV news
media.
We have authoritative scientific clout and plan to use it. The OMNS editorial board consists of:
Abram Hoffer, M.D.
Hugh D. Riordan, M.D.
Harold Foster, Ph.D.
Bradford Weeks, M.D.
I see the creation of the Orthomolecular Medicine News Service as an increasingly necessary step to counter the pharmaceutically-biased factoids and vitamin misinformation that the media seem ever so ready to accept uncritically. The recent allegedly-negative E and C studies bear this out. (http://www.doctoryourself.com/safety.html/ )
Now with many hundreds of media email addresses, both newspaper and TV, we will shortly go ahead with a mass e-mail press release and inaugural announcement.
YES, YOU TOO MAY SUBSCRIBE TO THE ORTHOMOLECULAR NEWS SERVICE, free of charge. To do so, you will need to promptly send a blank email to omns-subscribe@doctoryourself.com . (Requests to other addresses, such as my regular email address, will not be processed.)
ASCORBATE: THE SCIENCE OF VITAMIN C
"It's not what we don't know that harms us, but what we do know that ain't so." (Eubie Blake, 1883-1983)
What is it about a little left-handed molecule of six carbons, six oxygens, and eight hydrogens that ticks off so many in the medical community? Maybe it's cases like this one: Ray, a health professional I know, had an 11-month old son who was very sick for over a week. No one, and I mean no one, in their family had had any sleep in a long time.
They were up night after night with this child, who had a high fever, glazed watery eyes, tons of thick watery mucus and labored breathing. The child would not sleep, and did little else but cry. The baby was under the care of a pediatrician, who, in the infant's eleven months on earth, had already prescribed twelve rounds of some very serious antibiotics. That they clearly were not working was all too apparent to Ray, who out of desperation decided to try something he previously had been taught to not try: bowel tolerance quantities of oral ascorbate.
Ray and his wife gave their baby some vitamin C about every 15 minutes. As a result, the baby
was noticeably improved in a matter of hours, and slept through the night. With frequent doses continuing, the child was completely well in 48 hours. Ray calculated that the baby had received just over 2,000 mg vitamin C per kilogram body weight per day. This is even more than what Dr. Frederick Robert Klenner customarily ordered for sick patients. Remarkably, at 20,000 milligrams of vitamin C/day, that 20-pound baby never had diarrhea. With such a little body, you have to marvel at where all of it was going. Of course, it is the opinion of those who promulgate the US RDA and related nutritional mythology that almost all of that baby's vitamin C went uselessly into the toilet. Ray and his wife would tell you differently. They would say
that their sick child soaked it up like a sponge, and then promptly got better.
For the layman unable to obtain intravenous vitamin C, one of the most important parts of Hickey and Roberts' new book, Ascorbate: The Science of Vitamin C, is its attention to oral administration, divided dosing, absorption, and vitamin C retention time in the bloodstream. With simple graphs and uncomplicated language, the authors illustrate 1) how high oral
doses of vitamin C yield higher blood levels of the vitamin, and 2) how dividing the oral doses maintains those higher levels. Although initially seeming almost too obvious to mention, these are not self-evident concepts. Government-based intake standards such as the RDA hinge on
ignoring them.
Hickey and Roberts zero in on this serious public health error. Their critical analysis of research studies purporting to justify a mere 100 or 200 mg/day ascorbate dose is worthy of Linus Pauling himself. Dr. Roberts says: "Stressed and even mildly ill people can tolerate 1,000 times more vitamin C, implying a change in biochemistry that was ignored in creating the
RDA. The RDA concept does not differentiate between short and long- term effects of deprivation.
The possibility that sub-clinical scurvy causes chronic disease has enormous implications for health. In setting the RDA, unsubstantiated risks of taking too much vitamin C have been accorded great importance, whereas the risks of not taking enough have been ignored. Real scientists understand that 'no scientific proof' is a fancy way of saying 'we don’t like this idea.' Furthermore, there is no clear mechanism for the RDA to be modified when new scientific evidence emerges."
Ascorbate: The Science of Vitamin C is a compellingly written, fast-paced inspection of belief-based bias that permeates the scientific method. It is not a tirade; Hickey and Roberts simply tell it the way it is. They are well qualified to do so. Steve Hickey has a PhD in Medical Biophysics from the University of Manchester, and spent about ten years in research at the
Manchester Medical School and associated hospitals. Interestingly, he had initially trained as a biologist specializing in pharmacology, later switching to biomechanics and medical physics. In addition to degrees in physiology and computer science, Hilary Roberts' University of Manchester PhD was on the effects of early life malnutrition. She spent ten years in research
and teaching at the university.
When asked how he and his coauthor came to write the book, Dr. Hickey said: "Since Linus Pauling's death, there seemed to be a great deal of misinformation. The NIH had performed some questionable experiments and were making the apparently ridiculous statement that blood plasma and tissues became saturated with low doses of vitamin C. There was no mainstream research on high doses and the establishment was making wild extrapolations from their low dose data. We could not see how a clinical trial with 200 mg of vitamin C, for example, could be used to suggest that higher doses were not effective. The work of physicians like Robert Cathcart, Archie Kalokerinos and Abram Hoffer intrigued us. The reported effects, especially of intravenous vitamin C, were astounding. It was difficult to find any reason to explain the lack of scientific follow-up. We had friends and relatives that were sick or dying from diseases that
high dose vitamin C was claimed to cure. Eventually we felt we had no choice but to write the book."
Dr. Roberts adds: "Most RDA standards are based on data which was not measured in actual experiments on real people. Even the small amount of data from the 19–30 year old subjects, who were measured, is based on neutrophils, a white blood cell type that is known to have unusual vitamin C biochemistry, along with an exceptional ability to pump the vitamin into
itself. Neutrophils have ascorbate levels from 25-60 times that of the surrounding plasma. This cell type is not a reliable model for the whole body."
Additional topics discussed in Ascorbate: The Science of Vitamin C include infectious disease, oxidation and illness, the safety of vitamin C, and a presentation of the authors' dynamic flow model of continual vitamin C-mediated tissue reduction. The book contains substantial sections
devoted to cardiovascular disease, with the welcome inclusion of an efficient discussion of the roles of vitamin E and lysine. Two excellent chapters on cancer take the starch right out of the Mayo Clinic "refutations" of the Pauling/Cameron vitamin C studies. The authors state that Dr.
Charles "Moertel's switch to oral does would clearly have biased the results" even though Pauling "stated clearly that intravenous doses are more effective than oral doses and explained the reasons for the difference."
Ascorbate: The Science of Vitamin C contains 575 references, and especially good ones. Though not alphabetized, all are keyed to the text with numbered footnotes. For a book this important, the index could be and should be more detailed. A glossary is included for the general reader.
All will enjoy the well-selected epigrams that form the chapter lead-in quotes.
The authors expert command of their topic has enabled them to successfully encompass an enormous, and enormously important, subject. To make a 216-page book this comprehensive, and also so exceptionally comprehensible as well, is no small achievement.
I wish I'd had a book of this caliber back in the 1970's when my kids were infants. I raised my children all the way into college without a single dose of any antiviral, antihistamine, or antibiotic. What they did get were megadoses of vitamin C. We, like so many other parents, learned the
principles of vitamin C therapy (quantity, frequency, and duration) at our kids' bedsides at three in the morning. Now, the pioneering work of megascorbate orthomolecular physicians has been concisely summarized and very skillfully explained in Ascorbate: The Science of Vitamin C. It is a thorough, up to date and very readable analysis of what, to some, may still appear to be a controversial topic.
Those who use it know that taking enough C results in three C's: patient comfort, low cost, and parental control. Without necessitating the use of invasive technology, nor the trauma of hospitalization, parents can regain confidence and mastery over illness to a degree that they might never have thought possible. For this reason, vitamin C therapy will, at least in
some quarters, continue be decried and denounced as irresponsible. It takes some real ego strength for a parent to stand firm and say, "This is what I am going to do: I am going to follow the Klenner/Pauling/Cathcart vitamin C protocol." Hickey and Roberts' review of vitamin C research is a solid buttress that makes such a stance possible. No bias or belief system
can withstand their first-rate presentation of the safety and effectiveness of megadoses of ascorbate.
Hickey S and Roberts H. Ascorbate: The science of vitamin C. 2004. ISBN 1-4116-0724-4. Morrisville, NC: Lulu.com. www.lulu.com/ascorbate NEW REVIEW of DOCTOR YOURSELF: Natural Healing that Works "Take Charge of Your Own Health"
Review by Beatrice Trum Hunter, in the Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients
Several recently published books deal with subjects that emphasize the importance of an individual taking charge of health practices and decisions. . . The illnesses and health problems discussed in Doctor Yourself: Natural Healing that Works are presented in alphabetical order,
and include acid reflux, allergies, hemorrhoids, sleep disorders, and vaccinations, among many others. According to Andrew Saul, many diseases can be treated with safe, inexpensive, and drugless approaches. He writes conversationally, interspersing protocols with personal
experiences and case stories. Take psoriasis, an intractable condition. Try a complete change of diet, with fresh foods, vegetable juices, lecithin, and vitamins including extra vitamin D, instead of the palliative ointments and lotions. For additional information on the scientific studies supporting the protocols. Dr. Saul refers readers to DoctorYourself.com website with
more than 4000 references.
Doctor Yourself: Natural Healing that Works, by Andrew, Saul, PhD.
(oversized quality paperback, 241 pages, bibliography, index, 2003) [from the Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients, #253-254, May 2004, p 132. http://www.townsendletter.com/ / Telephone (360)385-6021.] Editor's Note: This particular review was a special treat for me. Beatrice Trum Hunter's NATURAL FOODS COOKBOOK (New York: Pyramid, 1961) was one of the very first health books I read. (It is reviewed at http://www.hoboes.com/html/Diner/revue/naturalfoods.shtml) I was therefore most honored to have made her list of recommended books. Incidentally, the Townsend Letter also very favorably reviewed Doctor Yourself in the Aug-Sept 2004 issue. The review is posted at
http://www.doctoryourself.com/townsend.html . Additional reviews of my book are posted at http://www.doctoryourself.com/saulbooks.html/
TO ORDER AN AUTOGRAPHED COPY of DOCTOR YOURSELF:
Natural Healing that Works, please go to http://www.doctoryourself.com/order.html/
FREE ANTIVIRUS SOFTWARE
There is no longer any excuse to not have the latest and most recent, and
I mean this morning's, antivirus protection. With AVG Free Edition
Antivirus software, such protection is free and updates are, too. I have
used this excellent, downloadable, and totally free of charge program for
years:
http://free.grisoft.com/freeweb.php/doc/2/
(You can also go to http://www.grisoft.com )
FIRM FLUORIDE FACTS
Please especially note the sources of these statements.
"THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT FLUORIDE IS AN ESSENTIAL
NUTRIENT FOR HUMANS." (Physicians' Desk Reference)
http://www.pdrhealth.com/drug_info/nmdrugprofiles/nutsupdrugs/flu_0109.shtml
FLUORIDE IS NOT APPROVED BY THE U.S. FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION http://www.cm-life.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2004/12/06/41b3e6ab68a3c
("CITY REMOVES FLUORIDE FROM WATER. The City of Mount Pleasant (Michigan) followed the will of its resident-voters and began removing fluoride from its water supply. . . (City) ordinance states anything added to the city water must be approved by the Food and Drug
Administration, and fluoride is not.")
FLUORIDE DOES NOT WORK
California is 28% fluoridated; Hawaii is 9% fluoridated. These states are tied for the lowest rate of tooth loss in the USA. On the other hand, Kentucky is 100% fluoridated and has the highest toothless population of older adults.
(http://www.latimes.com/features/health/medicine/la-me-health2jan02,1,2990789.story?coll=la-health-medicine)
CORRECTION: My review of Pottenger's Cats, in the December, 2004 Newsletter (posted at http://www.doctoryourself.com/news/v5n1.txt ) omitted rightful mention of the Selene River Press (http://www.seleneriverpress.com/), publisher and distributor of health books.
They kindly provided me with the review copy of Pottenger's Cats.
VITAMIN E WITCH HUNT
by Michael Fumento
http://www.fumento.com/nutr/vitamine.html
Less than two months ago I debunked a report in the Lancet medical journal claiming antioxidants slightly increase your chance of dying, rather than reducing it as most researchers believe. Now I'm writing about a report that says the same thing about a specific antioxidant, vitamin E. Why are these pills being persecuted? Among the similarities of the earlier report and this one, authored by researchers at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, is that the mainstream media accepted both without question. Both times the researchers smugly declared their work to be the final word on the subject, though both reports were, as the vitamin E one
admitted, 'a qualitative departure from previous findings.'
Since a good scientist knows no single report ever proves anything, we know these weren't good scientists. In fact, they have less in common with Johns Hopkins than Matthew Hopkins - England's infamous 'Witch-finder General.'
Consider the vitamin E paper, published in The Annals of Internal Medicine (full citation at http://www.doctoryourself.com/safety.html ). It analyzed 19 clinical trials between 1993 and 2004, involving 136,000 people in all. These were combined into what's called a 'meta-analysis,'
which showed no overall increase in deaths. But at high levels, defined as above 400 international units (IUs) per day, the researchers insisted 'vitamin E supplements may increase (deaths) and should be avoided.'
A glaring problem with the report is that there have been far more than 19 vitamin E trials since 1993, and one way the pack was whittled down was by excluding all studies reporting fewer than 10 deaths. The witch-hunters weren't about to interrogate witnesses who might keep the accused from a visit to the gallows.
Also, if 'more is worse,' why did the two studies that used the highest dose, 2,000 IUs per day, indicate fewer deaths among vitamin E users? Another problem with declaring this report to be the final word on vitamin E is that while clinical trials are important, epidemiological studies cannot be ignored. Yet ignored they were.
Thus there was no reference to the 1996 one from the National Institute of Aging that followed 11,000 elderly persons for seven years and found that the death rate for vitamin E users was a third that of non-users. Adding another antioxidant, vitamin C, cut fatalities even more.
A 1993 Harvard study of 40,000 male health professionals found those who took at least 100 IUs daily for two years had a third fewer cases of heart disease than those receiving no vitamin E supplements.
A Harvard study of 87,000 nurses that year found an even greater reduction in heart disease when comparing women who took the highest amount of vitamin E vs. those taking the lowest amount. Does this have you running in terror at the sight of a vitamin E capsule?
But what's with the supplement witch-hunt? Why the reports of vitamin E flying on broomsticks, and beta carotene casting hexes? "Unfortunately, there are some doctors who are biased against dietary supplements," says John Hathcock, vice president of Scientific & International Affairs at the D.C.-based Council for Responsible Nutrition. To an extent, this is understandable. For one, some supplements are worthless while a few have proved harmful. But you just can't lump 'eye of newt' in together with vitamin E or other antioxidants.
Mainstream medicine is also biased toward that which has formal FDA approval. You know, like Vioxx. And never mind the many supplements such as iron and iodine that have tacit FDA support but no formal approval.
Some doctors also fret that people will try to substitute supplements for good eating habits. 'We don't think that people need to take vitamin E supplements, that they get enough from the diet,' said the lead vitamin E prosecutor, associate professor Edgar Miller.
Yet the average American gets only about 10 IU daily. With some studies showing 2,000 IUs to be beneficial, dietary intake leaves us a bit shy of the mark. Anyway, those taking vitamins and other supplements also have the best diets.
The final explanation for vitamin-pill persecution is that medical journals are becoming increasingly sensationalist. Publishing articles contrary to popular wisdom is a cheap and easy way to get headlines. But there's no excuse for throwing a noose around the neck of good
science and healthful products.
[Reprinted with the kind permission of the author. Michael Fumento http://www.fumento.com/) is a senior fellow at Hudson Institute, syndicated columnist with Scripps Howard News Service and author of BioEvolution: How Biotechnology is Changing our World.]
The GERSON THERAPY MOVIE IS NOW ONLINE!
If you've been wanting to watch THE GERSON MIRACLE ever since I reviewed it the July 20 Doctor Yourself Newsletter (http://www.doctoryourself.com/gersontherapy2.html or http://www.doctoryourself.com/news/v4n16.txt), you are in luck. The entire movie, or any specific chapter you like, can now be viewed FREE OF CHARGE at www.gersonmiracle.org/movie.html . Grab some unsalted popcorn and pull up a chair.
BOOK REVIEW:
FAST FOOD NATION: The Dark Side of the All-American Meal, by Eric
Schlosser.
Boston : Houghton Mifflin, 2001. ISBN: 0395977894
Why, why, why are so many, many, many people so sick, sick, sick? The main reason is staring right back at them from their dinner. It's the junk food, people. An ever-increasing proportion of our food is fast food. "In 1970, Americans spent about $6 billion on fast food; in 2000, they spent more than $110 billion," writes Eric Schlosser in his book Fast Food Nation. "They spend more on fast food than on movies, books, magazines, newspapers, videos, and recorded music - combined. . . On any given day in the United States, about one-quarter of the adult population visits a fast food restaurant." (p 3)
What does this mean to our health? Everything. Fast food is a high- additive, high-fat, high-meat, high-sugar, and high-salt diet. And what's just as bad, it's a low-fiber, low vitamin, low mineral diet to boot. Fast food is exactly the wrong way to eat.
And we are teaching our kids just how to do it . . .wrong. Chapter 2 discusses how the fast-food industry sells to kids, especially in schools. This is the last thing we need; a typical teenage boy already drinks 20 oz of soda a day. Indoctrination starts early: page 30 of Fast Food Nation shows a superb photo of Ronald McDonald speaking to a large room full of enraptured elementary schoolchildren. How can this be?
Because the cafeterias in so many of our school districts are for sale for the right price. The actual franchise income that any school district may get pales when compared to what fast food industry takes in. After all, says Schlosser, "A medium Coke that sells for $1.29 contains roughly 9 cents' worth of syrup."
Adults are to blame. We, not our kids, are the ones who allowed fast food in our schools. We are the ones who let Harlem Memorial Hospital contain its very own McDonald's. It is our money that enables McDonald's to open FIVE new restaurants every DAY. It is our U.S. Federal Communications Commission and our U.S. Federal Trade Commission that permit every American child to watch 10,000 television food ads every year. Are these ads for carrots? Not according to Yale professor Kelly Brownell, PhD., who says that 95% of TV food commercials promote candy, soft drinks and fast food.
Fast Food Nation is much more than a history of soda pop and the flipped burger. In Chapter 3, Schlosser takes us "Behind the Counter" to examine labor issues in the fast food biz. "No other industry in the United States has a workforce so dominated by adolescents," he writes. And teenagers work hard and they work cheap. Too cheap. "Increasing the federal minimum wage by a dollar (an hour) would add about two cents to the cost of a fast food hamburger." Fast Food Nations also explores "Why the Fries Taste Good" in Chapter 5, as well as the very real dangers for those who work at meat packing factories.
Your making a point to read the exceptionally well-written Fast Food Nation would be the perfect New Year's resolution. Here is some video encouragement to help you on your way as you change your lifestyle and fight to eat right:
DIET WARS
"Nobody ever got rich marketing self-control." That is my favorite quote from "Diet Wars," a recent PBS' Frontline presentation. If you missed this truly excellent program, you can still watch it online, for free, at
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/diet/view/
Privacy Statement:
We do not sell, and we do not share, our mailing list or your email address with anyone. We never send out advertisements of any kind. You may notice that there is no advertising at http://doctoryourself.com and no advertising in this newsletter. We have no financial connection with the supplement industry. We do not sell vitamins or other health products, except for Dr. Saul's books, which help fund these free public services.
AN IMPORTANT NOTE: This newsletter is not in any way offered as prescription, diagnosis nor treatment for any disease, illness, infirmity or physical condition. Any form of self-treatment or alternative health program
necessarily must involve an individual's acceptance of some risk, and no one should assume otherwise. Persons needing medical care should obtain it from a physician. Consult your doctor before making any health decision.
"DOCTOR YOURSELF" "DoctorYourself.com" and "Doctor Yourself Newsletter" are service marks of Andrew W. Saul. All rights reserved.
Copyright c 2005 and prior years Andrew W. Saul drsaul@doctoryourself.com . Permission to reproduce single copies of this newsletter FOR NON-COMMERCIAL, PERSONAL USE ONLY is hereby granted providing no alteration of content is made and authorship credit is
given.
Sunday, March 2, 2008
Schizophrenia and Orthomolecular Medicine
For 30 years the Canadian Schizophrenia Foundation has provided vital information, support and hope for effectively treating schizophrenia and related disorders.
What is Schizophrenia? Schizophrenia is not a split personality. It refers to a group of biochemical diseases which can affect a person physically, mentally and emotionally.
Schizophrenia can change the way a person hears, sees, tastes, think
and feels. Some studies have shown that the predisposition to schizophrenia is inherited. It affects one to three percent of the population and strikes mainly young people in all walks of life.
What Causes Schizophrenia? Some professionals blame fathers, mothers, society or environment. However, scientific evidence indicates that schizophrenia is caused by errors in body chemistry.
What are the Danger Signals? Schizophrenia can have symptoms which are similar to other illnesses and disorders. It is therefore necessary to see a competent physician if schizophrenia is suspected. The following are some of the most common complaints that persons with schizophrenia have:
• Extreme fatigue and feeling of weakness
• Dffficulty in concentrating and getting organized
• Loss of interest, withdrawal
• Depression unrelated to life circumstances
• Vague fears and anxieties
• Changes in sight, hearing, touch, taste or smell
• Change in character or behaviour
• Headaches
• Insomnia
How is it Diagnosed?
There is a great difference of opinion as to what constitutes schizophrenia and considerable variety in its diagnosis. Persons with schizophrenia or their relatives are often told the patient is emotionally disturbed, has had a nervous breakdown, has an immature personality, or is retarded. Unfortunately, no matter what terms are used, the majority do not get well on conventional treatments.
The principal method "used in diagnosing is clinical observation by the doctor. Avery useful psychological test, the Hoffer Osmond Diagnostic Tbst, which can be administered easily and quickly, has been developed to help in diagnosis.
How in Schizophrenia Treated? If left untreated, there is a natural recovery rate of about 35%. The usual forms of treatment are tranquilizers, psychotherapy or electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). There are many schools of thought and many opinions regarding the treatment of schizophrenia. It has been shown, however, that psychotherapy alone is not an effective treatment. ECT and tranquilizers may be useful as part of a good treatment program but cannot produce lasting benefits alone.
Orthomolecular treatment is reported to be effective in 80% or more of the cases and is the best treatment developed so far. This treatment usually includes a special diet, vitamins and minerals in accordance with the individual needs of the patient, and other therapeutic aids such as tranquilizers, supportive psychotherapy, and other treatments which the doctor thinks will be useful. Many persons with schizophrenia have low blood sugar (hypoglycemia) and allergies which are treated.
How Does Schizophrenia Affect Society? Schizophrenia is a frightening disease which can bring about a great deal of suffering to the patients and the family and severe problems to society. Schizophrenia is an important factor in social aid and welfare costs, health care costs, employment inefficiency, impaired learning ability, alcoholism, broken homes and suicide. The average person with schizophrenia will cost one to two million dollars to society, directly and indirectly, in his/her lifetime.
What Can be Done to Control Schizophrenia? Schizophrenia will only be conquered with effective diagnosis and treatment. The aim of the Canadian Schizophrenia Foundation is to conquer schizophrenia by:
• Informing the public about schizophrenia, its danger signals and what can be done about it.
• Helping the person with schizophrenia and the family to learn how to deal with this illness.
• Ensuring that effective diagnostic and treatment methods are instituted, and that people with schizophrenia are given a better chance of getting well than they have at present.
• Promoting research.
• Improving mental hospitals and treatment centres.
Orthomolecular Treatment
What is it? Orthomolecular treatment is defined as providing the brain and the body with the best possible biochemical environment, especially with those substances normally found in the body such as vitamins, minerals, amino acids and other essential molecules.
What are the Principal Components of the Treatment? Vitamins and minerals are administered according to the individual needs of patients. A good diet is considered to be an important part of the therapy. Treatment for such disorders as low blood sugar, allergies, and thyroid problems are included when necessary. Sometimes tranquilizers are used for brief periods, and other treatments and supportive therapy are included.
For Which Disorders is it Used? The orthomolecular treatment can be used for a wide variety of disorders such as schizophrenia and other mental illnesses, behaviour and learning disorders in children, problems of aging, alcoholism and addiction, arthritis, heart and circulatory problems and many other diseases.
How Can a Person Receive Orthomolecular Therapy? A physician sh6uld be consulted for all medical problems. The vitamin dosages and diet and other therapies should be regulated to suit the needs of the individual patient. If the physician is not familiar with the therapy, he can consult other physicians who are. In addition, the CSF can provide literature. Manuals for physicians are available, as well as a wealth of publications.
Are there anyAdverse Effects? The orthomolecular treatment is generally a very safe one. A small percentage of people experience some discomfort when taking vitamins, but the doctor can prescribe other forms ofthese vitamins or adjust the dose.
How Effective is Orthomolecular Treatment? In the treatment of schizophrenia, the American Schizophrenia Association Committee on Therapy reported 80% recoveries based on a follow up of 1,500 patients. Other physicians report a recovery rate of more than 75% and considerably higher in children. The orthomolecular treatment has been found to be highly effective in treating many other disorders including depression, behaviour and learning problems in children, alcoholism and problems associated with aging.
For additional information: http://www.orthomed.org/
What is Schizophrenia? Schizophrenia is not a split personality. It refers to a group of biochemical diseases which can affect a person physically, mentally and emotionally.
Schizophrenia can change the way a person hears, sees, tastes, think
and feels. Some studies have shown that the predisposition to schizophrenia is inherited. It affects one to three percent of the population and strikes mainly young people in all walks of life.
What Causes Schizophrenia? Some professionals blame fathers, mothers, society or environment. However, scientific evidence indicates that schizophrenia is caused by errors in body chemistry.
What are the Danger Signals? Schizophrenia can have symptoms which are similar to other illnesses and disorders. It is therefore necessary to see a competent physician if schizophrenia is suspected. The following are some of the most common complaints that persons with schizophrenia have:
• Extreme fatigue and feeling of weakness
• Dffficulty in concentrating and getting organized
• Loss of interest, withdrawal
• Depression unrelated to life circumstances
• Vague fears and anxieties
• Changes in sight, hearing, touch, taste or smell
• Change in character or behaviour
• Headaches
• Insomnia
How is it Diagnosed?
There is a great difference of opinion as to what constitutes schizophrenia and considerable variety in its diagnosis. Persons with schizophrenia or their relatives are often told the patient is emotionally disturbed, has had a nervous breakdown, has an immature personality, or is retarded. Unfortunately, no matter what terms are used, the majority do not get well on conventional treatments.
The principal method "used in diagnosing is clinical observation by the doctor. Avery useful psychological test, the Hoffer Osmond Diagnostic Tbst, which can be administered easily and quickly, has been developed to help in diagnosis.
How in Schizophrenia Treated? If left untreated, there is a natural recovery rate of about 35%. The usual forms of treatment are tranquilizers, psychotherapy or electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). There are many schools of thought and many opinions regarding the treatment of schizophrenia. It has been shown, however, that psychotherapy alone is not an effective treatment. ECT and tranquilizers may be useful as part of a good treatment program but cannot produce lasting benefits alone.
Orthomolecular treatment is reported to be effective in 80% or more of the cases and is the best treatment developed so far. This treatment usually includes a special diet, vitamins and minerals in accordance with the individual needs of the patient, and other therapeutic aids such as tranquilizers, supportive psychotherapy, and other treatments which the doctor thinks will be useful. Many persons with schizophrenia have low blood sugar (hypoglycemia) and allergies which are treated.
How Does Schizophrenia Affect Society? Schizophrenia is a frightening disease which can bring about a great deal of suffering to the patients and the family and severe problems to society. Schizophrenia is an important factor in social aid and welfare costs, health care costs, employment inefficiency, impaired learning ability, alcoholism, broken homes and suicide. The average person with schizophrenia will cost one to two million dollars to society, directly and indirectly, in his/her lifetime.
What Can be Done to Control Schizophrenia? Schizophrenia will only be conquered with effective diagnosis and treatment. The aim of the Canadian Schizophrenia Foundation is to conquer schizophrenia by:
• Informing the public about schizophrenia, its danger signals and what can be done about it.
• Helping the person with schizophrenia and the family to learn how to deal with this illness.
• Ensuring that effective diagnostic and treatment methods are instituted, and that people with schizophrenia are given a better chance of getting well than they have at present.
• Promoting research.
• Improving mental hospitals and treatment centres.
Orthomolecular Treatment
What is it? Orthomolecular treatment is defined as providing the brain and the body with the best possible biochemical environment, especially with those substances normally found in the body such as vitamins, minerals, amino acids and other essential molecules.
What are the Principal Components of the Treatment? Vitamins and minerals are administered according to the individual needs of patients. A good diet is considered to be an important part of the therapy. Treatment for such disorders as low blood sugar, allergies, and thyroid problems are included when necessary. Sometimes tranquilizers are used for brief periods, and other treatments and supportive therapy are included.
For Which Disorders is it Used? The orthomolecular treatment can be used for a wide variety of disorders such as schizophrenia and other mental illnesses, behaviour and learning disorders in children, problems of aging, alcoholism and addiction, arthritis, heart and circulatory problems and many other diseases.
How Can a Person Receive Orthomolecular Therapy? A physician sh6uld be consulted for all medical problems. The vitamin dosages and diet and other therapies should be regulated to suit the needs of the individual patient. If the physician is not familiar with the therapy, he can consult other physicians who are. In addition, the CSF can provide literature. Manuals for physicians are available, as well as a wealth of publications.
Are there anyAdverse Effects? The orthomolecular treatment is generally a very safe one. A small percentage of people experience some discomfort when taking vitamins, but the doctor can prescribe other forms ofthese vitamins or adjust the dose.
How Effective is Orthomolecular Treatment? In the treatment of schizophrenia, the American Schizophrenia Association Committee on Therapy reported 80% recoveries based on a follow up of 1,500 patients. Other physicians report a recovery rate of more than 75% and considerably higher in children. The orthomolecular treatment has been found to be highly effective in treating many other disorders including depression, behaviour and learning problems in children, alcoholism and problems associated with aging.
For additional information: http://www.orthomed.org/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)