Posts Tagged ‘research’

ADD and ADHD prevented by balancing the gut?

Approximately 6 million kids (ouch!) are diagnosed with ADD.  Many of the children are administered  brain-altering stimulant drugs (essentially “speed” and uppers”)that have been demonstrated to increase the likelihood of addictive behaviors.   There is no blood test for ADD; rather it’s based on a set of symptoms.  We know that ADD didn’t develop from a “Ritalin”deficiency.  

Fortunately a Finland based research group recently conducted a longitudinal study that followed 75 children from infants until about 13 years of age.  In the first six months of life, half of the children received a placebo and the other half received a probiotic referred to as Lactobacillus rhamnosus.  

At the end of 13 years, ADHD or Autism spectrum disorder was diagnosed in 17.1% of the half of the children that received the placebo.  In the other half of the children, that received the probiotic, none were diagnosed with ADHD or autism spectrum disorder.  That’s correct.  Zero, zilch.  http://www.drperlmutter.com/probiotic-prevents-adhd-autism/#more-3632

This study, although the first of hope to be many, demonstrates that the health of the microbiome can predetermine a brain disorder.

Be well,

Lynn

 

I went there…

I’m not an Immunologist but do research and have a personal interest in vaccines. The first three years of my son’s life involved healthy development. For one and half years following he experienced multiple seizures daily. The “pill for an ill” model was not effective. His seizures worsened. Once we sought biochemical supports, we identified my son was toxic in aluminum (an adjuvant used in vaccines) and that his detoxification pathways were “blocked”. Finally, within 2 weeks of addressing his detoxification pathways his seizures ended. He has remained seizure free for nearly 4 years.

My last 5 years has been devoted to my son’s recovery, the focus on systems support rather than symptom support, biochemical pathways specifically and nutrition. I spend much of my time researching on the interplay between hormones, immune, digestion, detoxification, the environment and neurotransmitters. I practice as a Functional Diagnostic Practitioner and encounter daily multiple instances of women, men and children experiencing all types of chronic diseases.

I believe SB 277 is not a bill predicated on science but rather a true conflict of interests driven by the government for profit driven purposes. As a nation, with the most vaccinated children in the world, our children are experiencing an epidemic of chronic disease.

“Fifty years ago, when the immunization schedule contained only four vaccines (for diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis and smallpox), autism was virtually unknown”. i In the past 20 years, autism has increased to 1 in 68 (from 1 in 20,000), ADHD has increased by at least 400 percent, asthma by 300 percent and allergies by 400 percent . ii Childhood type 1 diabetes runs risk in 1 in 400 children and childhood arthritis affects nearly 300,000 children.iii The food industry would be a logical finger-point of origin but let’s remember that the same government that decides what foods are safe to eat also governs the current vaccine schedule.

We’ve been advised that vaccinations are unavoidably “safe” yet, the current vaccination schedule has never been studied with truly vaccinated vs unvaccinated individuals and never studied with multiple vaccines delivered at once, specifically 49 doses in 14 vaccines by age 6.iv  Vaccines are prepared with adjuvants such as aluminum, mercury, MSG, formaldehyde, polysorbate 80 (foreign substances) with unpredictable inflammatory responses.

Thousands of parents that have witnessed permanent health issues and even death in their children after they received vaccines and yet are unable to sue the pharmaceutical companies due to a liability protection designed by the government. Allow me to emphasize: Pharmaceutical companies that manufacture vaccines are protected. There are no checks and balances. How can the government assist the pharmaceutical companies without proper safety data and allow no recourse? v

We know that in the first years of life the brain is reaching 80% development by age 2. An infant’s immune-response is heightened compared to a fully developed individual. vi We also know that nearly half of the world population has impaired detoxification <methylation> pathways (cannot support the excretion of metals and toxins).vii  And yet the government is attempting to enforce mandatory 24 doses of vaccines before age 2!

Am I against vaccines? No. Virulent diseases such as polio and diphtheria should be vaccinated against. If I were to vaccine my children all over again, I would

• Not allow my children to be vaccinated until after 2 years of age
• Not allow a vaccine if my child was feeling ill on the day of the injection
• Only permit virulent vaccines
• Only allow one vaccine injection per visit, not cluster-fed multiple vaccines.

We need to protect our children in their development, first and foremost. With the rise of immune diseases resulting from antibiotic resistance and autoimmunity, a lack of scientific research to substantiate the administering multiple vaccines at once (let alone injecting in our infants), no liability carried by the pharmaceutical companies, SB 277 will be putting our children at even greater risk of chronic disease.

i http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2004/12/29/vaccination-schedule-part-one.aspx
ii “Healing the New Childhood Epidemics”- Kenneth Bock, M.D. and Cameron Stauth
iii http://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/transcripts/1348_the-challenge-of-childhood-diabetes
iv http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org/2010/02/02/9-questions-that-stump-every-pro-vaccine-advocate-and-their-claims/
v http://www.nvic.org/NVIC-Vaccine-News/March-2011/No-Pharma-Liability–No-Vaccine-Mandates-.aspx
vi http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/11/03/right-vaccine-dosage-for-babies.aspx
vii http://www.dramyyasko.com/resources/autism-pathways-to-recovery/chapter-2/

Be well,

Lynn

For parents only…

straws

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If you have kids, you’ll love this research.

A recent 2014 study in The Journal of the Federation of American
Societies for Experimental Biology looked at whether having
teens drink a green smoothie to start their day could improve
their health, energy, and school performance.

High schools took part in this 3-month study and they were
instructed to have a daily smoothie which provided 2 cups of
veggies (very easy to do).

The results were the following:

* Waist circumference decreased by 3% on average

* HDL (good cholesterol) increased in 25% of students

* Energy improved in 27% of students

* 10% percent had better grades

* Afternoon lethargy dropped from 35% to 22%

Not bad at all if you ask me. Just by adding in ONE green
smoothie each day!

Here are a few great green smoothie starters:

Strawberries and Cream Smoothie
1 cup frozen strawberries
1 cup frozen mixed berries (the more berries you add, the more purple it looks)
1 banana
1 cup almond/coconut milk
1/4 cup fresh baby spinach

Pineapple Upside Down
2 cups fresh spinach
2 cups almond milk, unsweetened
1 cup pineapple
1 cup cherries, pitted*
1 banana

or create your own! Do you have a successful smoothie?

Let me know.

Be well,

Lynn

(adapted from Yuri Elkaim’s blog)

Fat is in. Sugar is out.

According to Dr. Perlmutter, a NY Times bestseller and world respected neurologist, ‘fat is the preferred fuel of humans and has been for all of human evolution.’ We can survive on minimal carbohydrates but would die without fats. When we deprive our bodies with good fats, including cholesterol particles, we deprive our organ that is made up of 30% fat, the brain. The Mayo Clinic conducted a study in 2012 that revealed that older people that consumed a majority of their calories from carbohydrates (Refined flours, sugars, pastas, breads) have nearly four times the risk of developing mild dementia, a precursor to Alzheimer’s. Memory, thinking, language and overall cognitive impairments were the behaviors monitored. Diets rich in healthy fats were found to be 42 percent less likely to experience cognitive impairment (Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease).   The National Institute of Health found similar findings. “Higher levels of cholesterol is associated with better memory function”. Published in the journal Neurology, a study revealed that high cholesterol is a protective factor in the development of ALS (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, also referred to as Lou Gehrig’s disease). In the Journal of Movement Disorders 2008 research revealed that people with the lowest LDL cholesterol were at a 350 percent increased risk of developing Parkinson’s disease.

What about research for the heart? The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition published a study in 2008 that looked closely at 21 previous medical reports that involved monitoring health in 340,000 subjects over 3 to 5 years. It concluded that “intake of saturated fat was not associated with an increased risk of coronary heart disease, stroke, or cardiovascular disease”. It also compared those subjects that consumed a diet of saturated fats to those that did not. Those  subjects that did consume a diet in saturated fat had a 19% lower risk of heart disease than those that did not. The authors concluded that the original findings of these studies were mildly suppressed by the initiatives of special interest groups (i.e. Big Pharma) to publish only articles that showed fat caused heart disease. (Keep in mind that 75% of research is conducted by these special interest groups).

The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition which consists of leading researchers from around the world has recently stated “At present there is no clear relation of saturated fatty acid intake to these outcomes (of obesity, cardiovascular disease, incidence of cancer and osteoporosis)”. The researchers concluded with “biological interactions between insulin resistance (high refined carbohydrate/sugar consumption), reflected by obesity and physical inactivity and carbohydrate quality and quantity”.

Yet mainstream medicine continues to perpetuate that LDL is so-called “bad cholesterol”. So what is LDL? Cholesterol is so important for optimizing the functions of the body. For this reason the body highly regulates cholesterol. Only 25% of cholesterol is made from foods.  This is why cholesterol readings can vary from certain times in the day!  If you don’t eat enough fats the body will make more cholesterol but most food doesn’t have cholesterol that can be absorbed. The remaining 75% is internally produced in the liver (another reason to support the liver).  Cholesterol is fat soluble and blood is liquid so it must be carried through the body by lipo proteins. Lipo proteins are identified as low-density lipo proteins (LDL), high-density lipo proteins (HDL).

Chris Kresser, a licensed integrative medicine practitioner, describes LDL using a helpful analogy. The blood stream is like a river. The LDL particles are the boats that carry cholesterol and fats around the body. The cholesterol and fats are the cargo in the boats. Today mainstream medicine is looking at the amount cargo in the boats, or rather the LDL. What we should be measuring is the number of boats, the LDL particles. This is a much greater indicator of risk for heart disease.

So what can be affecting healthy LDL particles? Oxidative stress naturally occurs within the body for energy production. It’s a process that ages or “rusts” cells. Think of an apple turning brown after you cut it. Oxidative stress is expedited by a poor diet (excess sugar intake and refined carbohydrates), lack of exercise, and low resources known as anti-oxidants. If oxidative stress is increased then cells become severely damaged by free radicals as do the LDL molecules responsible for carrying fats to the brain. In addition, excess sugar binds with LDL increasing the risk for free radical formation by 350 times. As a result oxidized LDL becomes smaller and denser. The lining of the artery becomes fragile and oxidized LDL stimulates collagen which forms fibrous plaque and weakens the stability of the plagues/walls making it more likely to rupture. This creates heart attacks.

Nothing could be farther from the truth with the idea eating cholesterol and saturated fats raises cholesterol levels and that high cholesterol in the blood is what’s driving heart disease.  Fat is not the enemy; sugar is.

Next blog I’ll share what tests you should be taking and how you can discuss this with your doctor.

Be well,

Lynn

If there is no such thing as “bad” cholesterol then why the increase in heart disease?

So why did it take so long for researchers to identify that Ancel Keys study was seriously flawed? The rise of obesity and chronic illness has finally forced health professionals to question why fat has been so largely discouraged. The deeply falsified details of Ancel Keys findings are surfacing. “When researchers went back and analyzed some of the data from the Seven Countries study, they found that what best correlated with heart disease was not saturated fat intake but sugar,” http://time.com/96626/6-facts-about-saturated-fat-that-will-astound-you/ .  Several studies to date confirm that in fact it is sugar that increases the risk of heart disease, not fats.

Recently published by the JAMA (Journal of American Medical Association) was its findings that sugar is the major culprit leading to heart disease among many other chronic diseases. USA today featured an article summarizing its findings:

“• People who consumed more than 21% of daily calories from added sugar had double the risk of death from heart disease as those who consumed less than 10% of calories from added sugars.

A person on a 2,000-calorie diet who consumes 21% of their daily calories from added sugar would be eating 420 calories from added sugar, which would be roughly three cans of regular soda a day.

• People who consumed between 17% to 21% of daily calories from added sugar had a 38% higher risk of death from heart disease than people who consumed less than 10% of calories from added sugars.

• People who consumed seven or more servings a week of sugar-sweetened beverages were at a 29% higher risk of death from heart disease than those who consumed one serving or less.

• The findings were consistent across age groups, sex, physical-activity levels, weights and dietary habits.

• Added sugar intake has changed slightly over the past 20 years, from 16% of daily calories in 1994 to 17% in 2004 to 15% in 2010.

The paper’s senior author Frank Hu, a professor of nutrition and epidemiology at the Harvard School of Public Health, says excessive intake of added sugar appears to negatively affect health in several ways. It has been linked to the development of high blood pressure, increased triglycerides (blood fats), low HDL (good) cholesterol, fatty liver problems, as well as making insulin less effective in lowering blood sugar.

Rachel Johnson, a spokeswoman for the American Heart Association and a nutrition professor at the University of Vermont, says, “Now we know that too much added sugar doesn’t just make us fat, it increases our risk of death from heart disease.””

(Taken from USA Today’s “Eating too much added sugar may be killing you”. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/02/03/added-sugars-heart-disease-death/5183799/) .

Stay tuned for the next part in this series on the technical side of how sugar increases the risk of heart disease.

Be well,

Lynn