5 Foods That Can Trigger a Stroke

By Melanie Haiken, Caring.com

Tue, Sep 06, 2011

Few things feel more terrifying and random than a stroke, which can strike without warning. And fear of stroke -- when a blood vessel in or leading to the brain bursts or is blocked by a blood clot, starving brain cells of oxygen and nutrients -- is well founded. After all, stroke is the number-three killer in the U.S., affecting more than 700,000 people each year. Here are five foods that cause the damage that leads to stroke.

1. Crackers, chips, and store-bought pastries and baked goods

Muffins, doughnuts, chips, crackers, and many other baked goods are high in trans fats, which are hydrogenated oils popular with commercial bakeries because they stay solid at room temperature, so the products don't require refrigeration. Also listed on labels as "partially hydrogenated" or hydrogenated oils, trans fats are found in all kinds of snack foods, frozen foods, and baked goods, including salad dressings, microwave popcorn, stuffing mixes, frozen tater tots and French fries, cake mixes, and whipped toppings. They're also what makes margarine stay in a solid cube. The worst offenders are fried fast foods such as onion rings, French fries, and fried chicken.

Why it's bad

For years scientists have known trans fats are dangerous artery-blockers, upping the concentrations of lipids and bad cholesterol in the blood and loweringgood cholesterol. Now we can add stroke to the list of dangers. This year researchers at the University of North Carolina found that women who ate 7 grams of trans fat each day -- about the amount in two doughnuts or half a serving of French fries -- had 30 percent more strokes (the ischemic type, caused by blocked blood flow to the brain) than women who ate just 1 gram a day. Another recent study, also in women, found that trans fats promoted inflammation and higher levels of C-reactive protein, which have been linked to an increased risk ofdiabetes, heart disease, and stroke.

Results of medication studies in top medical journals may be misleading to readers

By Enrique Rivero
erivero@mednet.ucla.edu

UCLA-Harvard study highlights 3 types of confusing outcome measures

Studies about medications published in the most influential medical journals are frequently designed in a way that yields misleading or confusing results, new research suggests.

Investigators from the medical schools at UCLA and Harvard analyzed all the randomized medication trials published in the six highest-impact general medicine journals between June 1, 2008, and Sept. 30, 2010, to determine the prevalence of three types of outcome measures that make data interpretation difficult.

In addition, they reviewed each study's abstract to determine the percentage that reported results using relative rather than absolute numbers, which can also be a misleading.

The findings are published online in the Journal of General Internal Medicine.

The six journals examined by the investigators— the New England Journal of Medicine, the Journal of the American Medical Association, The Lancet, the Annals of Internal Medicine, the British Medical Journal and the Archives of Internal Medicine — included studies that used the following types of outcome measures, which have received increasing criticism from scientific experts:

Half of Americans sip sugary drinks daily

By Madison Park, CNN

August 31, 2011 -- Updated 1747 GMT (0147 HKT)

(CNN) -- When it was first invented, soda pop was a treat most people had once in a while for special occasions.

Now it's a daily fixture in American life -- in bright containers glowing inside vending machines, chugged from 32-ounce bucket-like containers at self-service stations and served as the default beverage in fast-food meals.

In today's carbonation nation, half of the U.S. population over age 2 consumes sugary drinks daily, according to a report released by National Center for Health Statistics.

The sugary drinks include sodas, sweetened waters, and energy, sports and fruit beverages. Not included in the total were diet drinks, 100% fruit juices, sweetened teas and flavored milk. The report states that sugary drinks have been linked to "poor diet quality, weight gain, obesity, and in adults, type 2 diabetes."

Male teens are the most frequent consumers and guzzle about 252 to 273 calories every day from various drinks, the report says. Their one-day consumption is more than half the weekly intake suggested by the American Heart Association, which recommends no more than three 12-ounce cans of soda in one week (equivalent to 450 calories).

The consumption of such sugary drinks has increased over the last 30 years, the report stated.

A 2003 study published in the Journal of the American Dietetic Association found that soda drinking for youths between the ages of 6 and 17 was at 37% in the 1970s and then 56% in the 1990s. This latest research from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention suggests that from 2005 to 2008, consumption increased again.

"If you look at male children, 70% consume on a given day," said lead author Cynthia Ogden, a CDC epidemiologist who specializes in obesity.

The analysis was based on 17,000 participants who were asked to recall what they ate in the last 24 hours in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.

The American Beverage Association denied that its products fueled obesity: "Contrary to what may be implied ... sugar-sweetened beverages are not driving health issues like obesity and diabetes."

It pointed to market data indicating that the calories in beverages decreased by 21% from 1998 to 2008, while obesity rates climbed. It also stated that sugar-sweetened beverages account for 7% of calories in the average American diet.

"That means Americans get 93 percent of their calories from other foods and beverages," the group stated.

The latest CDC research released Wednesday also found similar results: Kids and teens get about 6.7% to 8.2% of their daily caloric intake from the beverages, and adults get about 5% to 8%.

Another Reason to Ignore the Warnings About This Super Food

By Dr. Mercola

The idea that eggs, as a source of saturated fats, are unhealthy and promote heart disease is a complete myth. While it's true that fats from animal sources contain cholesterol, this is not necessarily something that will harm you. On the contrary, the evidence clearly shows that eggs are one of the most healthful foods you can eat, and can actually help prevent disease, including heart disease.

For example, one 2009 study discovered that the proteins in cooked eggs are converted by gastrointestinal enzymes, producing peptides that act as ACE inhibitors (common prescription medications for lowering blood pressure). This certainly flies in the face of 'conventional wisdom,' and the latest findings support the stance that eggs are in fact part of a heart-healthy diet.

Although egg yolks are relatively high in cholesterol, numerous studies have confirmed that eggs have virtually nothing to do with raising your cholesterol. For instance, research published in the International Journal of Cardiology showed that, in healthy adults, eating eggs every day did not produce a negative effect on endothelial function (an aggregate measure of cardiac risk); nor did it increase cholesterol levels.

A number of people have cholesterol levels that are too low. While eating egg yolks is a great idea for a number of reasons, it will not increase your cholesterol level. If you need to do that a fairly reliable method is to use coconut oil. Usually about 2-4 tablespoons a day are required to increase your cholesterol.

How to Reduce Your Risk of Cancer By 50%

I have some vital information for you that can literally save your life, save you from dying from cancer; not just from getting cancer, but from dying from it. I came across this absolutely vital information while researching my new book called, Dark Deception, info which is just too important to keep under wraps until the book's release in a year's time.

Cancer is now the number one cause of death in the country, having surpassed heart disease a few years ago.

Please check out the graph in the video that illustrates the relationship between latitude, sun exposure and death rates from cancer. Remember the vertical axis shows the number of cancer-related deaths per 100,000, while the horizontal axis indicates latitude. It clearly shows that cancer-deaths go up significantly, the farther away from the equator one lives.

Here's why. With sun exposure, UVB radiation from the sun converts cholesterol to vitamin D, one of the most potent anticancer vitamins. See the connection? Please keep your vitamin D levels in a healthy range. If you're taking oral vitamin D in cod liver oil or a supplement, you need to measure your vitamin D blood levels to avoid overdosing. Take a simple blood test to help you keep your vitamin D levels in a safe, optimal range, and go to my vitamin D testing page for more details

While in Maui this winter, I heard a number of heartbreaking stories from folks there, who told me of close relatives who either had cancer, were dying from it or had died from it. How tragic! With this new information about vitamin D in mind, I said to them, "I don't know your relative." I asked, "But did they stay in the sun? Do they have a tan?", and even though some of these people lived in Maui, it seems every one of these people did not get much sun and were pale. This was a giant clue, empirically confirming what I was learning about sun exposure.

The best and safest way to get vitamin D is from the sun. The safe way to get sun exposure is to just go out enough so that your skin turns the very lightest pink. You'll also need enough of your skin exposed to sun. Exposing only your face and hands while going from office to car is not enough for conversion into vitamin D. We must remain sensible in our approach to this issue. This means: PLEASE DON'T GET SUNBURNED!

Bear in mind unique risk factors for dark-complexioned individuals. So if you're African-American, from the Middle East or India and live in America or Europe or in a very northern latitude, you're at very high risk for developing these cancers, as high as four times the risk. Darker skin serves as a filter, causing the need for two to five times as much sunlight as someone with very pale skin.


Also be careful about using most sunblocks as they are dangerous.
If you are looking for a safe one I have researched this and recommend Active Full Spectrum Sun Block. If you can't easily find it I put it in my store for your convenience.


In light-skinned individuals, overexposure to sun can also be problematic.

Normally, skin cancer is not going to be the melanoma type, for which there are multiple causes. Follow the link below to learn more. But having sun exposure can increase the risk of other types of skin cancers, which while not as dangerous as melanoma, are easily avoided with cautious sun exposure

BOTTOM LINE: NEVER GET SUNBURNED!

Effect of dietary krill oil supplementation on the endocannabinoidome of metabolically relevant tissues from high fat-fed mice.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (omega-3-PUFA) are known to ameliorate several metabolic risk factors for cardiovascular disease, and an association between elevated peripheral levels of endogenous ligands of cannabinoid receptors (endocannabinoids) and the metabolic syndrome has been reported. We investigated the dose-dependent effects of dietary omega-3-PUFA supplementation, given as krill oil (KO), on metabolic parameters in high fat diet (HFD)-fed mice and, in parallel, on the levels, in inguinal and epididymal adipose tissue (AT), liver, gastrocnemius muscle, kidneys and heart, of: 1) the endocannabinoids, anandamide and 2-arachidonoylglycerol (2-AG), 2) two anandamide congeners which activate PPARalpha but not cannabinoid receptors, N-oleoylethanolamine (OEA) and N-palmitoylethanolamine (PEA), and 3) the direct biosynthetic precursors of these compounds. Methods: Lipids were identified and quantified using liquid chromatography coupled to atmospheric pressure chemical ionization single quadrupole mass spectrometry (LC-APCI- MS) or high resolution ion trap-time of flight mass spectrometry (LC-IT-ToF-MS).

Eight-week HFD increased endocannabinoid levels in all tissues except the liver and epididymal AT, and KO reduced anandamide and/or 2-AG levels in all tissues but not in the liver, usually in a dose-dependent manner. Levels of endocannabinoid precursors were also generally down-regulated, indicating that KO affects levels of endocannabinoids in part by reducing the availability of their biosynthetic precursors. Usually smaller effects were found of KO on OEA and PEA levels. Conclusions: Our data suggest that KO may promote therapeutic benefit by reducing endocannabinoid precursor availability and hence endocannabinoid biosynthesis.

Eggs' Antioxidant Properties May Help Prevent Heart Disease and Cancer, Study Suggests

While eggs are well known to be an excellent source of proteins, lipids, vitamins and minerals, researchers at the University of Alberta recently discovered they also contain antioxidant properties, which helps in the prevention of cardiovascular disease and cancer.

Jianping Wu, Andreas Schieber and graduate students Chamila Nimalaratne and Daise Lopes-Lutz of the U of A Department of Agricultural Food and Nutritional Science examined egg yolks produced by hens fed typical diets of either primarily wheat or corn. They found the yolks contained two amino acids, tryptophan and tyrosine, which have high antioxidant properties.

After analyzing the properties, the researchers determined that two egg yolks in their raw state have almost twice as many antioxidant properties as an apple and about the same as half a serving (25 grams) of cranberries.

However, when the eggs were fried or boiled, antioxidant properties were reduced by about half, and a little more than half if the eggs were cooked in a microwave.

"It's a big reduction but it still leaves eggs equal to apples in their antioxidant value," said Wu.

The findings were published in the peer-reviewed journal Food Chemistry.

The discovery of these two amino acids, while important, may only signify the beginning of finding antioxidant properties in egg yolks, said Wu, an associate professor of agricultural, food and nutritional science.

"Ultimately, we're trying to map antioxidants in egg yolks so we have to look at all of the properties in the yolks that could contain antioxidants, as well as how the eggs are ingested," said Wu, adding that he and his team will examine the other type of antioxidant already known to be in eggs, carotenoids, the yellow pigment in egg yolk, as well as peptides.

In previous research, Wu found that egg proteins were converted by enzymes in the stomach and small intestines and produced peptides that act the same way as ACE inhibitors, prescriptions drugs that are used to lower high blood pressure.

That finding defied common wisdom and contradicted the public perception that eggs increased high blood pressure because of their high cholesterol content. Additional research by Wu suggests the peptides can be formulated to help prevent and treat hypertension.

Wu is convinced the peptides also have some antioxidant properties, which leads him to suggest that when he completes the next step in his research, the result will likely be that eggs have more antioxidant properties than we currently know.

LET THE SUN SHINE – VITAMIN D

The sunshine vitamin beams in the health news spotlight with mega health benefits.

 By Deborah Tukua, www.chiropractorswritehand.com

Sunshine on his shoulders made John Denver so happy he sang its praises.  When you read all the health benefits that keep vitamin D beaming in the health news spotlight, you should be singing its praises too.  A friend recently told me how much more energetic and happy she feels now that she’s spending time sunbathing outside this summer. My friend, Valerie also said, “I finally came to realize that the sun is natural. It’s there for our wellbeing.” Why was this fact something Valerie just recently accepted? Because like most consumers, she’s listened to the barrage of beauty and skin experts advise us for years to totally ban sun exposure. We are advised to slather on sunblock, sunglasses, hats and gear every time we step outside, as though we’re entering a toxic zone. Fortunately, there are health professionals willing to speak the truth despite current mainstream trends. 

A rise in malignant melanomas in the US heightened the scare of sun exposure in the 1970s and ‘80s.  It was assumed that skin cancers were the result of over exposure to UVB rays from the sun.   However, we have since learned that, “Skin cancer is also caused by UVA rays, which most sun blocks don’t block. Thus, by making people vitamin D deficient, they inadvertently increased people’s risk of developing all forms of skin cancer, including the deadly malignant melanoma,” states Dr. Russell Blaylock, MD, author of the Blaylock Wellness Report.

What is vitamin D and its Benefits

'Gifted' natural vitamin E tocotrienol protects brain against stroke in 3 ways

COLUMBUS, Ohio – A natural form of vitamin E called alpha-tocotrienol can trigger production of a protein in the brain that clears toxins from nerve cells, preventing those cells from dying after a stroke, new research shows.

This process is one of three mechanisms identified so far that this form of vitamin E uses to protect brain cells after a stroke, meaning that this natural substance might be more potent than drugs targeting single mechanisms for preventing stroke damage, according to Ohio State University scientists who have studied the nutrient for more than a decade.

These researchers previously reported that the tocotrienol form of vitamin E protects the brain after a stroke by blocking an enzyme from releasing toxic fatty acids and inhibiting activity of a gene that can lead to neuron death.

Vitamin E occurs naturally in eight different forms, and all of this work is focused on the tocotrienol form, also known as TCT. The commonly known form of vitamin E belongs to a variety called tocopherols. TCT is not abundant in the American diet but is available as a nutritional supplement. It is a common component of a typical Southeast Asian diet.

In this new study, the researchers first clarified the role of a protein called MRP1, or multidrug resistance-associated protein 1. This protein clears away a compound that can cause toxicity and cell death when it builds up in neurons as a result of the trauma of blocked blood flow associated with a stroke.

They then determined that TCT taken orally influences production of this protein by elevating the activity of genes that make MRP1. This appears to occur at the microRNA level; a microRNA is a small segment of RNA that influences a gene's protein-building function.

This is one of the first studies to provide evidence that a safe nutrient – a vitamin – can alter microRNA biology to produce a favorable disease outcome," said Chandan Sen, professor and vice chair for research in Ohio State's Department of Surgery and senior author of the study. "Here, a natural nutritional product is simultaneously acting on multiple targets to help prevent stroke-induced brain damage. That is a gifted molecule."

The research appears online and is scheduled for later print publication in the journal Stroke.

Over the past decade, Sen has led numerous studies on how the TCT form of vitamin E protects the brain against stroke damage in animal and cell models, and intends to eventually pursue tests of its potential to both prevent and treat strokes in humans. Approximately 795,000 Americans suffer new or recurrent strokes each year, and stroke is the third-leading cause of death in the United States, according to the American Stroke Association.

These latest research findings in mice follow a recent Food and Drug Administration certification of TCT as "Generally Recognized as Safe." The scientists conclude in the paper that even before clinical trials can take place, "TCT may be considered as a preventive nutritional countermeasure for people at high risk for stroke."

To determine the role of MRP1 in protecting brain cells, the researchers compared the effects of an induced stroke in two groups of mice: normal mice and animals that were genetically modified to be deficient in the MRP1 protein.

Both groups of mice showed comparably decreased blood flow in the area of the stroke, but the mice deficient in MRP1 had a larger volume of tissue death than did normal mice.

The mice with the protein deficiency also had a 1.6-fold higher level of a toxin that is cleared by MRP1. This toxin is called GSSG, or glutathione disulfide, and these researchers have previously shown that a failure to clear this toxin appears to trigger neuron death in the brain after stroke.

"The protein has the effect of dredging out the toxin," said Sen, who is also a deputy director of Ohio State's Davis Heart and Lung Research Institute. "A significant finding in this work is the recognition that MRP1 is a protective factor against stroke. Thanks to tocotrienol, we were able to identify that path."

The presence of GSSG is linked to an excessive amount of glutamate that is released in the brain after a stroke. Glutamate is a neurotransmitter that, in tiny amounts, has important roles in learning and memory. Too much of it triggers a sequence of reactions that lead to the death of brain cells – the most damaging effects of a stroke.

This experiment showed for the first time that the loss of MRP1 function impairs the clearance of GSSG, and that MRP1 cells were recruited to the site of the stroke in normal mice, indicating this protein has a protective role in the brain after a stroke.

The researchers searched databases containing genomic data for a microRNA that appeared to have potential to influence production of MRP1. MicroRNAs bind to messenger RNA, which contains the actual set of instructions for building proteins. When that connection is made, however, the microRNA inhibits the building of protein from messenger RNA. So an inverse relationship exists between a microRNA and a protein it controls.

The researchers saw this very relationship in the cell study in which they manipulated the candidate microRNA levels and observed the effects of changing those levels on the presence of the MRP1 protein.

Finally, the researchers compared mice that were treated with TCT supplements or corn oil as a control for 13 weeks before a stroke was induced. The amount of damaged brain tissue was smaller in the mice that received TCT supplementation than in the mice receiving corn oil. In addition, TCT supplementation was associated with a lower level of the candidate microRNA in the damaged brain tissue, as well as an increase in the abundance of MRP1 cells at the stroke site.

"Essentially what we are showing with mechanistic explanation is that tocotrienol protects neural cells. It is anti-neurodegenerative," Sen said. "This form of vitamin E helped us identify three major checkpoints in stroke-related neurodegeneration that were not known before we began testing tocotrienols against neurodegeneration"

This Cooking Oil is a Powerful Virus-Destroyer and Antibiotic…

You've no doubt noticed that for about the last 60 years the majority of health care officials and the media have been telling you saturated fats are bad for your health and lead to a host of negative consequences, like elevated cholesterol, obesity, heart disease and Alzheimer's disease.

Meanwhile during this same 60 years the American levels of heart disease, obesity, elevated serum cholesterol and Alzheimer's have skyrocketed compared to our ancestors, and even compared to modern-day primitive societies using saturated fat as a dietary staple.

Did you know that multiple studies on Pacific Island populations who get 30-60% of their total caloric intact from fully saturated coconut oil have all shown nearly non-existent rates of cardiovascular disease?^[1]

Clearly, a lot of confusion and contradictory evidence exists on the subject of saturated fats, even among health care professionals.

But I'm going to tell you something that public health officials and the media aren't telling you.

The fact is, all saturated fats are not created equal.

The operative word here is "created", because some saturated fats occur naturally, while other fats are artificially manipulated into a saturated state through the man-made process called hydrogenation.

Hydrogenation manipulates vegetable and seed oils by adding hydrogen atoms while heating the oil, producing a rancid, thickened oil that really only benefits processed food shelf life and corporate profits.

The medical and scientific communities are now fairly united in the opinion that hydrogenated vegetable and seed oils should be avoided.

These unsaturated fats, artificially manipulated into saturated fats, are also called trans fats, and no doubt you've heard about them lately. Some cities and states have now outlawed their use. There is no controversy anymore regarding the health dangers of these artificially saturated fats.

And guess what?

These are the same damaged trans fats that have been touted as "healthy" and "heart-friendly" for the last 60 years by the vegetable and seed oil interests!

But the truth finally came out. Trans fat was rebuked, debunked, and revealed as the true enemy to good health that it has always been, regardless of what the seed- and vegetable oil shills told the American public for the last half century.

Unfortunately, this rightful vilification of hydrogenated saturated fats has created a lot of confusion regarding naturally occurring saturated fats, including coconut oil.

If one form of saturated fat is bad for you, the argument goes, then all saturated fat must be bad.

Right?

Nothing could be further from the truth!

Salt: How Bad Is It, Really?

Much like cell phones and eggs, salt is one of those things that studies say is bad for you one day, but O.K. the next.

Just last year, an article in the New England Journal of Medicine estimated (using previous studies' numbers) that the U.S. could prevent 44,000 deaths annually if Americans reduced their salt intake by 3 grams per day.

Then, early this month, a review of seven real-life interventions to reduce salt consumption found nothing of the sort. The review, from the Cochrane Collaboration, found only ambiguity, with no evidence to suggest that salt reduction did the trial participants any good or any harm.

"It's Time to End the War on Salt," a headline in Scientific American proclaimed last week. "For every study that suggests that salt is unhealthy, another does not," the article said. As if to prove that point, a new paper this week in the journal Archives of Internal Medicine now argues, again, that too much salt is bad.

The latest study used national U.S. survey data linked to mortality files to show that the more salt people ate, the higher their death rates from all causes combined. The study looked further at salt intake in relation to potassium intake, and found that the lower people's potassium and the higher their sodium, the more likely they were to develop heart disease or die of a heart-related cause.

So just how bad is salt for us exactly — and why is there so much disagreement on the issue?

Are diet sodas making you fat?

Diet sodas: A sweet-tasting, calorie-free reprieve from the doldrums of boring diets? Apparently, not so much. Diet drinks, it turns out, might actually make you heavier, according to two new studies. Sure, the health benefits of diet drinks have been called into question before, with recent studies linking artificially sweetened drinks to an increased risk of heart disease. But many guzzlers of diet drinks have long regarded their favorite beverages as health neutral, since they lack both calories and fat. Are those dreams now dashed? Here, a brief guide to these new findings:

What did the researchers find?
Regular consumption of diet drinks expands one's waist over time, according to one study at the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio. A second study supported previously made associations between diet soda and the risk of diabetes. Researchers fed aspartame (the artificial sweetener in diet sodas) to diabetes-prone mice, and found that mice on the aspartame diet had higher blood sugar than the mice who didn't consume the chemical.

Forget the mice. How do they know diet soda expands waistlines?
Researchers recorded the height, weight, waist circumference, and diet soda intakes of 474 participants. They then measured again in three follow-up exams over two decades. Diet soda drinkers experienced 70 percent greater increases in waist circumference than non-drinkers. Those who said they were frequent drinkers — consuming two or more diet sodas a day — experienced waist circumference increases that were 500 percent greater than those who didn't drink diet soda at all.

How is that possible?
That is still unknown, but researchers speculate that the artificial sweeteners warp appetite, leaving diet soda drinkers hungry for unhealthy treats.

Does exercise play a role?
Nope. The results were the same for all diet soda drinkers, even after factors such as exercise, social class, education, and smoking were taken into account.

So, no more diet drinks?
Perhaps diet soda drinkers should consider cutting back. "The fizzy chemical cocktail can still do a number on your health," says Margaret Harmann at Jezebel. "It may be time to rethink your commitment to being comprised of 70 percent Diet Coke." Helen Hazuda, the professor who conducted the study, stopped drinking diet sodas, saying, "They may be free of calories but not of consequences."

Move Like a Hunter-Gatherer, Live Longer

One of the best ways to reduce your risk of chronic disease and live a longer life may be to act like a hunter-gatherer.

Scientists recently analyzed the physical habits of our hunter-gatherer ancestors -- people who tended to engage in short bursts of physical activity (mostly outside) coupled with periods of rest -- and health experts agree we'd probably all be better off physically if we followed that example. In fact, our bodies may be genetically programmed for it.

Walk on the Wild Side
Our hunter-gatherer predecessors were pretty busy. Whether they were digging for roots and tubers; making tools; building shelters; hunting; or carrying logs, food, or small children, they were often on the move. All in all, they probably expended between 800 and 1,200 calories per day doing physical things -- most of them outdoors. But the average American today? We expend only a small fraction of energy doing anything physical. As a result, our stamina, muscle strength, and flexibility aren't maintained. What's more, our inactive ways cause us to miss out on yet more healthful habits enjoyed by hunter-gatherers -- socializing and outdoor living. Hunting and foraging in small groups provided our ancestors with a social outlet and an opportunity to be outside frequently -- both of which are natural mood boosters. (Related: Discover why outdoor workouts are better for your mood and your health.)

Get Back to Nature
Human beings lived for eons as hunter-gatherers, so it's not surprising that our bodies are built to thrive under physically demanding conditions outside. Ready to activate your hunter-gatherer genes? Here's a fitness plan that will help emulate the hunter-gatherer way:

Hit the trails. Researchers estimate that hunter-gatherers walked between 4 and 10 miles a day just to find necessities! While you might not be able to hit that lofty mark, you could probably do a lot more than you're currently doing. Find ways to walk more during everyday tasks, and bake a daily walk into your schedule as well. Try these three tricks to boost walking benefits.


Lift things. At least two to three times a week, you should do some strength training. Instead of carrying logs, carry groceries, laundry, kids, and pets. Instead of stacking rocks, lift weights at home or at the gym. Watch this video to see why strength training is so good for women's weight.


Get your flex on. Activities like yoga, dancing, tai chi, and gardening can help improve your flexibility -- something that hunter-gatherers had in spades. Here's an easy 12-point yoga pose you can do every day.


Do it outdoors. Exercising outside on natural surfaces (the ones we evolved with, like grass and dirt) works more muscles and boosts your balance.


Work out with a buddy. You'll get the added benefit of mood-boosting social interaction.


Mix it up. Once or twice a week, alternate short bursts of moderate- to high-intensity physical activity with periods of rest and recovery to challenge your heart and lungs. Follow harder workout days with easier workout days. Hunter-gatherers got lots of rest, relaxation, and sleep when recovering from physically demanding days. Here's another good reason to stay in bed.

'Bad' Cholesterol Not as Bad as People Think, Study Shows

ScienceDaily (May 8, 2011) — The so-called "bad cholesterol" -- low-density lipoprotein commonly called LDL -- may not be so bad after all, shows a Texas A&M University study that casts new light on the cholesterol debate, particularly among adults who exercise.

Steve Riechman, a researcher in the Department of Health and Kinesiology, says the study reveals that LDL is not the evil Darth Vader of health it has been made out to be in recent years and that new attitudes need to be adopted in regards to the substance. His work, with help from colleagues from the University of Pittsburgh, Kent State University, the Johns Hopkins Weight Management Center and the Northern Ontario School of Medicine, is published in the Journal of Gerontology.

Lack of sleep found to be a new risk factor for colon cancer

An inadequate amount of sleep has been associated with higher risks of obesity, heart disease, diabetes, and death. Now colon cancer can be added to the list.

In a ground-breaking new study published in the Feb. 15, 2011 issue of the journal Cancer, researchers from University Hospitals (UH) Case Medical Center and Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, found that individuals who averaged less than six hours of sleep at night had an almost 50 percent increase in the risk of colorectal adenomas compared with individuals sleeping at least seven hours per night. Adenomas are a precursor to cancer tumors, and left untreated, they can turn malignant.

"To our knowledge, this is the first study to report a significant association of sleep duration and colorectal adenomas," said Li Li, MD, PhD, the study's principal investigator, family medicine physician in the Department of Family Medicine at UH Case Medical Center and Associate Professor of Family Medicine, Epidemiology and Biostatistics at Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine. "A short amount of sleep can now be viewed as a new risk factor for the development of the development of colon cancer."

In the study, patients were surveyed by phone prior to coming into the hospital for scheduled colonoscopies at UH Case Medical Center. They were asked demographic information as well as questions from the Pittsburg Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), which obtains information about the patient's overall sleep quality during the past month. The PSQI asks for such information as how frequently one has trouble sleeping and how much sleep one has had per night. The study was funded by the National Cancer Institute through Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine.

Of the 1,240 patients, 338 were diagnosed with colorectal adenomas at their colonoscopy. The patients with adenomas were found in general to have reported sleeping less than six hours compared to compared to those patients without adenomas (control) patients, and the association between amount of sleep and adenomas remained even when adjusted for family history, smoking, and waist-to-hip ratio (a measurement of obesity).

The researchers also found a slightly stronger association of sleep duration with adenomas with women compared to men, but the difference was not statistically significant.

Dr Li said the magnitude of the increase in risk due to less hours of sleep is comparable to the risk associated with having a first-degree relative (parent or sibling) with colon cancer, as well as with high, red meat intake. "Short sleep duration is a public health hazard leading not only to obesity, diabetes and coronary heart disease, but also, as we now have shown in this study, colon adenomas," he said. "Effective intervention to increase duration of sleep and improve quality of sleep could be an under-appreciated avenue for prevention of colorectal cancer."

Although why fewer hours of sleep may lead to colon cancer is unknown, Dr. Li said some of theories include that less sleep may mean less production of melatonin, a natural hormone that in animals has been linked to DNA repair, or that insulin resistance may underlie the link between sleep disturbance and cancer development.

Low vitamin D levels linked to diabetes risk

NEW YORK — Lower levels of vitamin D circulating in the bloodstream are tied to a higher risk of developing diabetes in a new study of Australian adults.

After following more than 5,000 people for 5 years, the researchers found those with lower than average vitamin D levels had a 57 percent increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes compared with people with levels in the recommended range.

"Studies like ours have suggested that blood levels of vitamin D higher than what is recommended for bone health may be necessary to reduce the risk of developing type 2 diabetes," said lead author Dr. Claudia Gagnon, a fellow at the Western Hospital at the University of Melbourne in Australia, where the study was done.

Vitamin D is manufactured by the body in response to sunlight and also occurs naturally in some foods, like eggs, cod and salmon. The vitamin is best known for its role in working with calcium to build bones.

The Institute of Medicine recommends that adults get about 600 IU of vitamin D a day to maintain circulating levels in the desirable range.

Past studies have shown that vitamin D may also help keep blood sugar levels under control. In type 2 diabetes, the most common form of the disease, the body can't use insulin it produces efficiently to control blood sugar levels. Vitamin D may play a role by increasing the release of insulin, Gagnon said.

To see whether circulating D levels and calcium consumption influenced insulin sensitivity and diabetes risk, Gagnon's team measured the vitamin D blood levels of 5,200 people without diabetes. After 5 years, about 200 of them had developed diabetes, and the researchers measured everyone's vitamin D levels again.

Risk of diabetes rises 57 percent
The researchers found that twice as many people — 6 in 100 — with low blood levels of vitamin D later developed diabetes, compared to those with blood levels in the normal range —3 in 100.

When the researchers took into consideration risk factors for diabetes such as age, waist circumference, and a family history of the disease, the increased risk from low D levels translated to 57 percent, relative to those with higher levels.

Calcium is also thought to participate in insulin release, but the researchers found no link between the mineral and risk of developing diabetes later.

"Lower levels of vitamin D in the blood were associated with an increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes," Gagnon told Reuters Health by e-mail. "However, our findings do not prove cause and effect."

Further studies are needed, Gagnon's group writes in the journal Diabetes Care, both to directly test whether vitamin D supplements make a difference in diabetes risk, and if so, to determine the optimal circulating D levels to minimize that risk.

It's hard to know what exactly the link between vitamin D and diabetes is, Dr. Ian de Boer, assistant professor of medicine at the University of Washington in Seattle, told Reuters Health.

Obesity, inactivity may be factors
But obesity and inactivity, the highest risk factors for type 2 diabetes, may be the cause of low vitamin D levels, said de Boer, who did not work on the Australian study.

Vitamin D has also been linked to lower risks of asthma, heart disease, and certain cancers. However, there hasn't been much evidence showing that taking supplements helps these conditions.

Vitamin D is widely available for less than $10 for a 2-month supply.

The sun is the major vitamin D source for most people, but salmon and fortified dairy products also contain a lot, de Boer added.

The best ways to reduce diabetes risk are still to exercise and eat a healthy diet, he said.

"I don't think there's conclusive information that supplementing with vitamin D reduces diabetes risk," de Boer said.

Popular Drink Increases Stroke Risk

In a study of 2564 people of varying ethnic backgrounds, researchers at Columbia University in New York and the Miller School of Medicine in Miami found a significant correlation between diet soda consumption and the risk of stroke.

Begun in 1993, the Northern Manhattan Study known as NOMAS has been ongoing and still continues. Researchers divided people into seven groups: those who drank less than one soda of any type per month, those with moderate soda consumption (up to six per week), daily regular soda consumption (one or more daily), moderate diet soda only, daily diet soda only, moderate diet soda and sometimes regular soda, and daily diet soda with any regular soda consumption.

Scientists factored in the age, ethnicity, gender, exercise habits, smoking status, alcohol consumption, and caloric intake. During the test period participants had 559 strokes combined.

After considering all the other factors studied, researchers concluded that regular diet soda drinkers had a 48% increased chance of having a stroke, while those who drank diet soda every day had a 61% increased risk of stroke over those who drank other types of soda.

Concurrently, it is important to note that Diet Coke recently moved into the number two position of most popular beverage among Americans–a scary proposition considering the recent study findings.

The stroke culprit is likely aspartame, an artificial sweetener that has been linked to dozens of other health conditions. According to Lynne Melcombe, author of Health Hazards of White Sugar, research links aspartame to the following health conditions: anxiety attacks; appetite problems such as binge-eating and sugar cravings; birth defects; blindness and vision problems such as blurred vision, bright flashes, and tunnel vision; brain tumors; chest pain; depression and emotional problems; dizziness and vertigo; edema; epilepsy and seizures; fatigue; headaches and migraines; hearing loss and tinnitus; heart palpitations and arrhythmia; hyperactivity; insomnia; joint pain; learning disabilities; memory loss; menstrual irregularities and PMS (premenstrual syndrome); muscle cramps; nausea; numbness of extremities; psychiatric disorders; reproductive problems; skin lesions; slurred speech; and uterine tumors. Research even links aspartame to death. Aspartame’s effects can be mistaken for Alzheimer’s disease, chronic fatigue syndrome, epilepsy, Epstein-Barr virus, Huntington’s chorea, hypothyroidism, Lou Gehrig’s disease; Lyme disease, Ménière’s disease, multiple sclerosis, and postpolio syndrome.

According to Randall Fitzgerald, author of The Hundred-Year Lie, some of the cancers linked to aspartame include: brain, liver, lung, kidney, and lymphoreticular cancer.

Is Sugar Toxic?

On May 26, 2009, Robert Lustig gave a lecture called “Sugar: The Bitter Truth,” which was posted on YouTube the following July. Since then, it has been viewed well over 800,000 times, gaining new viewers at a rate of about 50,000 per month, fairly remarkable numbers for a 90-minute discussion of the nuances of fructose biochemistry and human physiology.

Lustig is a specialist on pediatric hormone disorders and the leading expert in childhood obesity at the University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine, which is one of the best medical schools in the country. He published his first paper on childhood obesity a dozen years ago, and he has been treating patients and doing research on the disorder ever since.

The viral success of his lecture, though, has little to do with Lustig’s impressive credentials and far more with the persuasive case he makes that sugar is a “toxin” or a “poison,” terms he uses together 13 times through the course of the lecture, in addition to the five references to sugar as merely “evil.” And by “sugar,” Lustig means not only the white granulated stuff that we put in coffee and sprinkle on cereal — technically known as sucrose — but also high-fructose corn syrup, which has already become without Lustig’s help what he calls “the most demonized additive known to man.”

It doesn’t hurt Lustig’s cause that he is a compelling public speaker. His critics argue that what makes him compelling is his practice of taking suggestive evidence and insisting that it’s incontrovertible. Lustig certainly doesn’t dabble in shades of gray. Sugar is not just an empty calorie, he says; its effect on us is much more insidious. “It’s not about the calories,” he says. “It has nothing to do with the calories. It’s a poison by itself.”

If Lustig is right, then our excessive consumption of sugar is the primary reason that the numbers of obese and diabetic Americans have skyrocketed in the past 30 years. But his argument implies more than that. If Lustig is right, it would mean that sugar is also the likely dietary cause of several other chronic ailments widely considered to be diseases of Western lifestyles — heart disease, hypertension and many common cancers among them.

The number of viewers Lustig has attracted suggests that people are paying attention to his argument. When I set out to interview public health authorities and researchers for this article, they would often initiate the interview with some variation of the comment “surely you’ve spoken to Robert Lustig,” not because Lustig has done any of the key research on sugar himself, which he hasn’t, but because he’s willing to insist publicly and unambiguously, when most researchers are not, that sugar is a toxic substance that people abuse. In Lustig’s view, sugar should be thought of, like cigarettes and alcohol, as something that’s killing us.

This brings us to the salient question: Can sugar possibly be as bad as Lustig says it is?

It’s one thing to suggest, as most nutritionists will, that a healthful diet includes more fruits and vegetables, and maybe less fat, red meat and salt, or less of everything. It’s entirely different to claim that one particularly cherished aspect of our diet might not just be an unhealthful indulgence but actually be toxic, that when you bake your children a birthday cake or give them lemonade on a hot summer day, you may be doing them more harm than good, despite all the love that goes with it. Suggesting that sugar might kill us is what zealots do. But Lustig, who has genuine expertise, has accumulated and synthesized a mass of evidence, which he finds compelling enough to convict sugar. His critics consider that evidence insufficient, but there’s no way to know who might be right, or what must be done to find out, without discussing it.

If I didn’t buy this argument myself, I wouldn’t be writing about it here. And I also have a disclaimer to acknowledge. I’ve spent much of the last decade doing journalistic research on diet and chronic disease — some of the more contrarian findings, on dietary fat, appeared in this magazine —– and I have come to conclusions similar to Lustig’s.

The Claim: To Reduce Snoring, Try Sleeping on Your Side

Chronic snoring can be more than a noisy nuisance. Up to three-quarters of nightly snorers also have sleep apnea, which causes breathing interruptions throughout the night. Sleep apnea raises the risk of heart disease, stroke and high blood pressure.

Snorers looking for a cure are often told to sleep on their sides, not on their backs, so that the base of the tongue will not collapse into the back of the throat, narrowing the airway and obstructing breathing. But for some snorers, changing sleep position may not make much of a difference.

Scientists say there are two types of snorers: those who snore only when they sleep on their backs, and those who do it regardless of their position. After sleep researchers in Israel examined more than 2,000 sleep apnea patients, for example, they found that 54 percent were “positional,” meaning they snored only when asleep on their backs. The rest were “nonpositional.”

Other studies have shown that weight plays a major role. In one large study, published in 1997, patients who snored or had breathing abnormalities only while sleeping on their backs were typically thinner, while their nonpositional counterparts usually were heavier. The latter group, wrote the authors, consequently suffered worse sleep and more daytime fatigue.

But that study also found that patients who were overweight saw reductions in the severity of their apnea when they lost weight. According to the National Sleep Foundation, in people who are overweight, slimming down is generally the best way to cure sleep apnea and end snoring for good.

How to Reduce Your Risk of Cancer By 50%

I have some vital information for you that can literally save your life, save you from dying from cancer; not just from getting cancer, but from dying from it. I came across this absolutely vital information while researching my new book called, Dark Deception, info which is just too important to keep under wraps until the book's release in a year's time.

Cancer is now the number one cause of death in the country, having surpassed heart disease a few years ago.

Please check out the graph in the video that illustrates the relationship between latitude, sun exposure and death rates from cancer. Remember the vertical axis shows the number of cancer-related deaths per 100,000, while the horizontal axis indicates latitude. It clearly shows that cancer-deaths go up significantly, the farther away from the equator one lives.

Here's why. With sun exposure, UVB radiation from the sun converts cholesterol to vitamin D, one of the most potent anticancer vitamins. See the connection? Please keep your vitamin D levels in a healthy range. If you're taking oral vitamin D in cod liver oil or a supplement, you need to measure your vitamin D blood levels to avoid overdosing. Take a simple blood test to help you keep your vitamin D levels in a safe, optimal range, and go to my vitamin D testing page for more details

While in Maui this winter, I heard a number of heartbreaking stories from folks there, who told me of close relatives who either had cancer, were dying from it or had died from it. How tragic! With this new information about vitamin D in mind, I said to them, "I don't know your relative." I asked, "But did they stay in the sun? Do they have a tan?", and even though some of these people lived in Maui, it seems every one of these people did not get much sun and were pale. This was a giant clue, empirically confirming what I was learning about sun exposure.