Special Health Alert: Death Begins in a Toxic Colon!
by Angela A. Lansford
I know talking about your bowel function; constipation, diarrhea and diseases caused by neglecting the health of your colon is certainly not a pleasant subject...
But, it just might be worth investigating, if you can learn how to improve your health, or better yet, avoid serious health problems that develop from having a toxic colon.
And the good news is, there are some really excellent and simple ways you can protect yourself.
The first step is learning about the benefits of colon cleansing and how keeping your elimination system strong, and in optimal working order, is vital to living a long, healthy life.
Let’s be honest, no one who eats a "modern" diet can escape the formation of mucoid and metabolic waste deposits on the inner walls of their colon. For instance, consumption of white bread which contains very little or no fiber, has large amounts of gluten which is a sticky wheat protein... and forms a pasty glue inside our intestines.
Our digestive systems were never designed to handle this type of food, not to mention all the fats, sugar, and preservatives commonly found within most every product on our grocery store shelves.
Obviously, we aren’t going to stop eating. But even if you’re careful with your diet, watching what you eat all the time; it’s almost inevitably that our digestive tracts, and particularly your colon, can become compromised. Over time your colon can become partially blocked, terribly distorted, or dysfunctional through years of poor eating habits, stress, alcohol or drug use.
The end result can be dehydration causing chronic constipation, or alternating bouts of diarrhea and poor general health.
In fact, many people who are not particularly over weight or obese, may be carrying around 10 to 25 pounds of dried fecal matter in their colons! Overweight, over stressed, or people with severe allergies could easily have even more than that! Children are not exempt either, and poor eating habits may lead to a lifetime of digestive disorders, if ignored.
Accumulated waste built up in your colon can lead to colon toxicity which is responsible for many body imbalances, and could be the underlying cause of many of the weight and health problems we see people struggling with every day.
The first step to a truly successful weight loss program, may involve cleansing your colon and a visit to your local colon hydrotherapist.
Maintaining a healthy colon is vital to helping you maintain a healthy body, and essential to regaining optimum health. If you want to prevent colon toxicity, chronic disease and premature aging, cleansing your colon is essential.
Doesn’t this just make common sense?
If you are carrying around toxic metabolic waste in your colon day after day, for weeks or even months at a time, how can you possibly maintain a healthy body? This unwanted build-up adheres to the walls of your colon and can interfere with natural peristalsis — the wave-like muscle contractions which move waste deposits along the approximate 5½ feet of your colon — and ultimate elimination.
This colon dysfunction, along with inadequate daily water consumption, can be a primary contributor to chronic constipation.
When large amounts of the colon's surface become coated with impermeable dried fecal matter and lumps of mucous, 7 things can happen:
Delays in expelling fecal matter increase the amount of toxins absorbed into your body.
The absorption of nutrients that your body needs is severely restricted.
Water within the colon, that would normally be filtered back into the bloodstream, cannot be reabsorbed which leads to dehydration and autointoxication.
You may experience low energy levels, general muscle weakness, daily fatigue at work, and restless sleeping habits at night.
This toxic environment is the perfect breeding ground for harmful bacteria and parasites.
Chronic problems with constipation, irritable bowel syndrome and diarrhea.
Unexplained weight gains, and an inability to control or lose the excess weight, even though you eat a moderate, balanced diet.
Left untreated, a toxic colon can prevent you from metabolizing food, fat and absorbing the nutrients from the food you eat. Eventually your body and your health deteriorates, leading to disease and in extreme causes, death.
But this is entirely preventable. Colon cleansing is the best defense against colon toxicity developing, as well as maintaining a healthy diet and active lifestyle.
Don’t let an unhealthy colon become a breeding ground for toxic poisons, parasites, disease and death. Cleanse your colon today using a natural colon cleanser and visit a colon hydrotherapist if one is available in your area.
Diarrhea is just as strong an indicator of colon toxicity as is constipation!
Do you have any of the symptoms described in this Special Health Alert?
http://colonhealth.net/free_reports/alerttxt.htm
Saturday, December 11, 2010
Colon Hydrotherapy: A Forgotten Art
Colon Hydrotherapy: A Forgotten Art
by Tony Centracchio, P.A.
Colon Hydrotherapy, a popular form of treatment among certain physicians in the 1930's and 40's is undergoing a resurgence.
Colon lavage was first recorded 1500 B.C., in Ebers Papyrus, which dealt with the practice of medicine. These enemas were described as the infusion of aqueous substances into the large intestine through the anus.
Hippocrates (4th and 5th Century B.C.) recorded using enemas for fever therapy. Galen (2nd Century A.D.) also recognized and was proponent of the use of enemas. Pare in 1600 A.D. offered the first distinction between colon irrigation and the popular enema therapy of the age.
Colon Hydrotherapy, since the turn of the 20th century, has experienced periods of popularity alternating with periods of reaction. The factors that contributed to this ambivalence primarily were due to the practice of colon hydrotherapy by the untrained and unskilled, which was very detrimental to its professional growth.
When the therapy gained the attention of such physicians as James A. Wiltsie, M.D. and Joseph E.G. Waddington, M.D., great value was placed on the therapeutic benefits of this modality.
The philosophy attributed to colon therapy by certain physicians of this era was depicted by Dr. Waddington: "Abnormal functioning of the intestinal canal is the precursor of much ill-health, especially of chronic disease conditions. Restoration of physiologic intestinal elimination is often the first, but to often ignored, important preliminary to eventual restoration of the health in general."
Dr. Wiltsie contends that, "Our knowledge of the normal and abnormal physiology of the colon, and of its pathology and management, has not kept pace with that of many organs and systems of the body. As long as we continue to assume that the colon will take care of itself, just that long will we remain in complete ignorance of perhaps the most important source of ill health in the whole body."
In summary, through misconceptions, misunderstandings and preconceived emotionalism, controversy has prevailed, but accomplished nothing.
Historically, we recognize two unequivocal conclusions:
•First, there is something of value to this therapy, or it would have been conclusively withdrawn;
•Second, that through lack of professional control and study, colon hydrotherapy never received the attention and recognition it justly deserves.
Today, with modern technological advancements in colon hydrotherapy instrumentation, colon hydrotherapy has become a safe, valuable modality to the physician in treating disease.
The Colon Hydrotherapy Session
Colon hydrotherapy is an extended and more complete form of an enema. The treatment is designed to cleanse above the natural defecation area of the rectum to the cecum.
Colon hydrotherapy involves the gentle infusion of warm filtered water into the rectum, using no chemicals or drugs. It is the natural solution to conditions, which interfere with the normal functions of the colon.
The procedure includes the gentle insertion of a small rectal tube into the client by the therapist or physician. The individual lies on his back, and water is mechanically infused into and out of the intestine without any assistance on the part of the patient. The out flowing water removes excess flatus (gas), mucus, infectious material and feces.
Modern colon hydrotherapy instruments can incorporate a water pressure well below that of a standard hospital enema. The temperature, water pressure and flow can be continually monitored throughout the treatment by the operator. The treatment can be performed without any discomfort on the part of the patient. This is a closed system in that flatus (gas) and waste material are evacuated through the hose attached to the instrument and eliminated via the drain line.
There is no offensive odor or health risk to those in contact with sick patients as with enemas and bedpans and the dignity of the patient is maintained.
During the empty cycle, the therapist gently manipulated the abdomen over the intestine to facilitate removal of waste material. Under the direction of a physician, the temperature of the water can be alternated, inducing relaxation and contraction of colon muscular walls with warm and cool water respectively, providing benefit for the atonic bowel condition.
Colon hydrotherapy instruments also offer the administration of oxygen by prescription with the inflowing water for the treatment of parasites, as well as for anti-inflammatory and healing purposes. Supplemental infusion solutions (i.e. saline, kayxelate, etc.) or others as prescribed by a physician can be offered.
There are instruments, which feature a built-in check valve, which prevents waste water from returning to the water source. Colon hydrotherapy equipment also features a disposable unit, which consists of a speculum, obturator, water and waste line, eliminating any possible contamination of the patient from a previous treatment.
Colon hydrotherapy is thought to remove fecal material from colon walls and dilutes the bacterial toxin concentration in the large intestine. The cleansing effects of colon hydrotherapy reduce stagnation and subsequent bacterial proliferation in the colon and maintain harmony of the intestinal flora in promoting optimal colon health.
Therapeutic effects are improved muscle tone, which facilitates peristaltic action and enhances the absorption of nutrients from the cecum and ascending colon, while minimizing the absorption of toxic waste material. In addition, the removal of stagnant waste material and comprised toxins could rejuvenate the immune tissue that resides in the intestine — recent European studies speculate that a greater portion (80%) of immune tissue, than previously thought, resides in the intestines.
Colon hydrotherapy is not a cure-all, but an important adjunctive therapy in the overall health care of the patient. The principle involves tubular and cellular drainage outwardly from the rectum and inwardly via the portal and mesenteric lymphatic system.
The enema's cleansing ability is limited to the area of the rectosigmoid and shorter periods of time because of the body's natural wish to expel material from the rectum. Colon hydrotherapy extends beyond the natural expulsion area to offer greater cleansing and therapeutic benefits.
Variations in the enema therapy include: cleansing, which softens the feces and promotes evacuation of the bowel; retention, which softens the feces and lubricates the lower bowel and rectum, carminative, which is used primarily to relieve flatus (gas) and nutrient, which provides liquid nutrition for rapid absorption by the colon and rectum.
Disease and functional disturbances of the digestive organs are the most frequently complained about problems today. The health of most organs as well as our overall well-being depends upon how well our bowels (intestines) function. A change in the diet after many years of wrong eating habits does not assure optimal colon health.
The American Cancer Society suggests that bowel cancer is caused by environmental agents such as pesticides, herbicides and carcinogenic agents in the air.
Research has shown that regular use of refined carbohydrates and lack of fiber in the diet increases the transit time of bowel wastes and stimulates putrefaction in the colon. Both of these factors have been linked to constipation and certain bowel diseases such as: diverticulitis, colitis and colon cancer, which has a high success rate for cure with surgical management when detected early.
The American Cancer Society has provided evidence in recent years which suggest that bowel cancer is caused by environmental agents such as: pesticides and herbicides sprayed on crops, hormones, and antibiotics fed to animals, and carcinogenic agents in the air we breath.
Periodic cleansing of the colon could minimize the exposure of these potential carcinogens to the colon wall.
The indications for colon hydrotherapy as determined by the physician include:
acute fecal impaction constipation or bloating
colitus diarrhea
parasitic infections atonic colon
mucus colitis fever therapy
hyper/hypothermia para/quadriplegic bowel training
flatulence hemorrhoids (mild)
intestinal toxemia nutrient supplementation
diverticulosis detox alcohol/drug units
preparation for Barium x-ray colonoscopy or surgery
Other indications, which require direct supervision by physician, are Diverticulitis, ulcerative colitis, Crohn's disease, on site preparation following trauma, and up to 4 months of pregnancy.
The contraindications for colon hydrotherapy include:
Severe cardiac disease, (uncontrolled HTN or CHF), aneurysm, severe anemia, GI hemorrhage or perforation, severe hemorrhoids, cirrhosis, carcinoma of the colon, fissures fistulas, advanced pregnancy, abdominal hernia, recent colon surgery or renal insufficiency.
Common Concerns about Colon Hydrotherapy:
Laxatives vs. Colon Hydrotherapy
Laxatives act as chemical irritants and stimulate the muscular walls of the colon to abnormally contract to expel the irritating substances. It is very easy to become dependent upon these drugs.
The oral route of administration is the least optimal method of evacuation of the large intestine. Very important digestive processes occurring higher up in the alimentary tract (stomach and small intestine) are interfered with. Most laxatives and other cathartics precipitate dehydration in the patient.
Colon hydrotherapy alternately fills and empties the colon and would improve the hydration status of the patient.
What about possible electrolyte depletion in the colon?
When the body is properly nourished with good quality organic foods containing sodium, potassium and magnesium, the electrolyte level of the colon is replenished as part of the diet.
Will the intestinal flora be disturbed by Colon Hydrotherapy?
The large intestine is producing bacteria on a daily basis and adherence to proper nutrition will enhance the colon's ability to maintain balance following colon hydrotherapy. The physician may elect to prescribe lacto acidophilus/bacillus culture to facilitate this process or incorporate low fat dairy products (yogurt, etc.) into the patient's dietary program.
What about possible contamination?
Following a colon hydrotherapy treatment, the instrument is thoroughly cleansed and disinfected. A potent germicidal solution is used to properly disinfect the instrument and its contents are not harmful to the colon environment. When the disinfecting procedure is completed, the instrument is generously cleaned with water to flush the germicidal solution completely from the colon hydrotherapy instrument.
What about possible perforation of the colon?
Modern instruments can introduce a minimal starting pressure of 1/8 - 1/4 psi, which produces one pint of water per minute flow. The treatment, then, can be performed effectively, below the 1 psi setting (in contrast to a standard hospital enema, which starts as 2 psi and increases another psi per foot of elevation.
Colon Hydrotherapy as a preparation method?
Colon hydrotherapy offers valuable application as a preparation method for diagnostic study of the large intestine. The superior preparation would provide an optimal study (x-ray, sigmoidoscopy, and colonoscopy) and allow for a more accurate diagnosis. The procedure would minimize the incidence of improperly prepared patients and the need for repeat studies, which represents a significant cost factor, as well as in the case of Barium Enema, additional radiation exposure to the patient.
Over $400 million is spent annually on laxatives in the U.S.
Patient discomfort resulting from retained barium could be avoided utilizing colon hydrotherapy cleansing of the barium solution. Following the x-ray study, colon hydrotherapy would eliminate the problem of residual opaque material in subsequent upper GI series of plain film studies.
Finally, improved quality of the preparation preceding barium implantation may decrease the risk of perforation at the time of administration. In the specialty of gastroenterology, colon hydrotherapy would provide optimal preparation for sigmoidoscopy/colonoscopy and maximize the physician's timetable.
Colon hydrotherapy would also function as a valuable preparation for gastrointestinal surgery. This colon cleansing system would provide a more optimal surgical field and potentially decrease the risk of postoperative complications
Good health is as much a function of our elimination status as the quality of food we ingest. Consider that over 400 million dollars is spent annually on laxatives in the United States.
Every year 140,000 Americans are diagnosed as having colorectal cancer. Of this population, 44% will die as a result of the disease.
Colon cancer is the second leading cancer killer in the U.S., following lung cancer in men and breast cancer in women. At least two million suffer from colitis, ileitis and diverticulitis, and 100,000 have a colostomy each year.
Periodic cleansing could minimize the exposure of potential carcinogens to colon walls. The colon hydrotherapy procedure allows the opportunity for digital rectal examination. At this time a hemocult smear (persons over 30) could be obtained, and a screening method for the detection of colorectal cancer observed. Periodic cleansing could dilute the toxin concentration in the cecum and facilitate the removal of same.
The result is a reduced load on the portal and lymphatic system allowing the five eliminative organs to the body to balance the removal of these toxins with their production. When a breakdown in one or more of these systems exists and toxins abound, the potential for disease is greatly increased.
Research has shown a definite correlation between the nature of the diet and type of flora in the intestine. A diet high in protein results in predominantly proteolytic putrefactive bacteria, which produce toxic compounds, some of which are absorbed. Alteration of the physiologic Flora (balanced) can predispose to some 36 bacterial toxins. The physiologic (normal) Flora consists of 30 - 40% gram negative bacillus and over 30% acidophilus. The pathogenic Flora consists of streptococus, staphylococcus, E. coli, etc., which are present normally in small numbers.
When conditions exist that alter this proposed balance, the pathogenic Flora can flourish and be a source of disease.
Small amounts of protein, fats and carbohydrates escaping digestion in the small intestine may be digested by bacterial enzymes in the large intestine. These organisms are capable of breaking down (cellulose) and synthesize folic acid and other B vitamins, as well as vitamin K. E. coli has recently been recognized as being able to split triglycerides (fatty acids). Certain amino acids: tryptophan, tyrosine, phenylalanine and histidine under bacterial enzyme influence produce the toxic compounds: skatole, indole, phenol, cresol, histamine, etc.
The products of putrefaction may be absorbed in small quantities by the mucosa and transported to the liver, where they are detoxified to be excreted by the kidney in the form of sulfates and glucuronides. The material which remains in the colon and is eliminated in the feces contain indole, skatole, mercaptan, hydrogen sulfide and bacterial end products of cystine, which gives the feces an unpleasant odor. The color of the feces is due to bacterial action on stercobilin (bile pigment).
Some ammonia is formed by bacteria in the intestine, mainly from digestive products of proteins and converted to urea in the liver. In liver disease such as cirrhosis, increased levels of ammonia in the vascular system can cause neurological symptoms resembling hepatic coma. A low protein diet may ameliorate these systems.
Cleansing the colon serves to dilute and remove the toxin concentration in the large intestine and respective blood supply. Speculation has been made that a change in diet from high protein to high carbohydrate results in dominance of a non-putrefactive Flora.
Other evidence implies that the ingestion of fermentable carbohydrates (glucose, fructose, lactose) results in delay of or complete inhibition of the putrefactive process. The liver is the main detoxification organ of the body. The portal vein drains the gastrointestinal tract, gall bladder, pancreas and spleen. The blood retrieved from the stomach and intestines is not returned to the heart but shunted to the liver where portal blood is discharged into sinusoids of the liver, which are surrounded by liver cells. In addition to removing, altering, storing and delivering the body digested fats, carbohydrates, proteins, vitamins and minerals, hepatocyte (liver cells) would detoxify and toxic material present and remove them from the system.
The problem arises when toxins are present in too great a number to be adequately handled by the liver. As with any organ or system in the body, the liver has a certain capacity for performing these functions of metabolism. When an unusual burden is placed on any one system, a breakdown occurs which affects the body as a whole.
This breakdown results in an increased absorption of toxic substances, and if left uncollected the body will poison itself (autointoxication).
Intestinal cleansing is a therapeutic measure, which addresses the cause or source of the problem. Other measures, which treat only the symptoms, will provide only temporary relief of the problem. Colon hydrotherapy could clean and dilute the toxin load in the large intestine, resulting in a reduced burden on the liver, allowing the eliminative organs to function optimally.
Colon hydrotherapy could also prevent stagnation and minimize the exposure of carcinogenic agents to the colon wall. The above combined effect may serve to rejuvenate the immunological system and truly be a pathway to vibrant health!
References for this article will be supplied upon request.
About the author: Tony Centracchio, P.A., is a graduate of Cornell Medical College who has devoted years of research to upgrading and refining the technology of today's colon hydrotherapy instrumentation and who is closely associated with Dotolo Research. All editorials are submitted to our editorial board for review. Each article published is selected for its technical merit and overall excellence. Reproduced in its entirety from the October 1986 issue of "The American Chiropractor."
http://colonhealth.net/colon_hydrotherapy/forgottenart4.htm
by Tony Centracchio, P.A.
Colon Hydrotherapy, a popular form of treatment among certain physicians in the 1930's and 40's is undergoing a resurgence.
Colon lavage was first recorded 1500 B.C., in Ebers Papyrus, which dealt with the practice of medicine. These enemas were described as the infusion of aqueous substances into the large intestine through the anus.
Hippocrates (4th and 5th Century B.C.) recorded using enemas for fever therapy. Galen (2nd Century A.D.) also recognized and was proponent of the use of enemas. Pare in 1600 A.D. offered the first distinction between colon irrigation and the popular enema therapy of the age.
Colon Hydrotherapy, since the turn of the 20th century, has experienced periods of popularity alternating with periods of reaction. The factors that contributed to this ambivalence primarily were due to the practice of colon hydrotherapy by the untrained and unskilled, which was very detrimental to its professional growth.
When the therapy gained the attention of such physicians as James A. Wiltsie, M.D. and Joseph E.G. Waddington, M.D., great value was placed on the therapeutic benefits of this modality.
The philosophy attributed to colon therapy by certain physicians of this era was depicted by Dr. Waddington: "Abnormal functioning of the intestinal canal is the precursor of much ill-health, especially of chronic disease conditions. Restoration of physiologic intestinal elimination is often the first, but to often ignored, important preliminary to eventual restoration of the health in general."
Dr. Wiltsie contends that, "Our knowledge of the normal and abnormal physiology of the colon, and of its pathology and management, has not kept pace with that of many organs and systems of the body. As long as we continue to assume that the colon will take care of itself, just that long will we remain in complete ignorance of perhaps the most important source of ill health in the whole body."
In summary, through misconceptions, misunderstandings and preconceived emotionalism, controversy has prevailed, but accomplished nothing.
Historically, we recognize two unequivocal conclusions:
•First, there is something of value to this therapy, or it would have been conclusively withdrawn;
•Second, that through lack of professional control and study, colon hydrotherapy never received the attention and recognition it justly deserves.
Today, with modern technological advancements in colon hydrotherapy instrumentation, colon hydrotherapy has become a safe, valuable modality to the physician in treating disease.
The Colon Hydrotherapy Session
Colon hydrotherapy is an extended and more complete form of an enema. The treatment is designed to cleanse above the natural defecation area of the rectum to the cecum.
Colon hydrotherapy involves the gentle infusion of warm filtered water into the rectum, using no chemicals or drugs. It is the natural solution to conditions, which interfere with the normal functions of the colon.
The procedure includes the gentle insertion of a small rectal tube into the client by the therapist or physician. The individual lies on his back, and water is mechanically infused into and out of the intestine without any assistance on the part of the patient. The out flowing water removes excess flatus (gas), mucus, infectious material and feces.
Modern colon hydrotherapy instruments can incorporate a water pressure well below that of a standard hospital enema. The temperature, water pressure and flow can be continually monitored throughout the treatment by the operator. The treatment can be performed without any discomfort on the part of the patient. This is a closed system in that flatus (gas) and waste material are evacuated through the hose attached to the instrument and eliminated via the drain line.
There is no offensive odor or health risk to those in contact with sick patients as with enemas and bedpans and the dignity of the patient is maintained.
During the empty cycle, the therapist gently manipulated the abdomen over the intestine to facilitate removal of waste material. Under the direction of a physician, the temperature of the water can be alternated, inducing relaxation and contraction of colon muscular walls with warm and cool water respectively, providing benefit for the atonic bowel condition.
Colon hydrotherapy instruments also offer the administration of oxygen by prescription with the inflowing water for the treatment of parasites, as well as for anti-inflammatory and healing purposes. Supplemental infusion solutions (i.e. saline, kayxelate, etc.) or others as prescribed by a physician can be offered.
There are instruments, which feature a built-in check valve, which prevents waste water from returning to the water source. Colon hydrotherapy equipment also features a disposable unit, which consists of a speculum, obturator, water and waste line, eliminating any possible contamination of the patient from a previous treatment.
Colon hydrotherapy is thought to remove fecal material from colon walls and dilutes the bacterial toxin concentration in the large intestine. The cleansing effects of colon hydrotherapy reduce stagnation and subsequent bacterial proliferation in the colon and maintain harmony of the intestinal flora in promoting optimal colon health.
Therapeutic effects are improved muscle tone, which facilitates peristaltic action and enhances the absorption of nutrients from the cecum and ascending colon, while minimizing the absorption of toxic waste material. In addition, the removal of stagnant waste material and comprised toxins could rejuvenate the immune tissue that resides in the intestine — recent European studies speculate that a greater portion (80%) of immune tissue, than previously thought, resides in the intestines.
Colon hydrotherapy is not a cure-all, but an important adjunctive therapy in the overall health care of the patient. The principle involves tubular and cellular drainage outwardly from the rectum and inwardly via the portal and mesenteric lymphatic system.
The enema's cleansing ability is limited to the area of the rectosigmoid and shorter periods of time because of the body's natural wish to expel material from the rectum. Colon hydrotherapy extends beyond the natural expulsion area to offer greater cleansing and therapeutic benefits.
Variations in the enema therapy include: cleansing, which softens the feces and promotes evacuation of the bowel; retention, which softens the feces and lubricates the lower bowel and rectum, carminative, which is used primarily to relieve flatus (gas) and nutrient, which provides liquid nutrition for rapid absorption by the colon and rectum.
Disease and functional disturbances of the digestive organs are the most frequently complained about problems today. The health of most organs as well as our overall well-being depends upon how well our bowels (intestines) function. A change in the diet after many years of wrong eating habits does not assure optimal colon health.
The American Cancer Society suggests that bowel cancer is caused by environmental agents such as pesticides, herbicides and carcinogenic agents in the air.
Research has shown that regular use of refined carbohydrates and lack of fiber in the diet increases the transit time of bowel wastes and stimulates putrefaction in the colon. Both of these factors have been linked to constipation and certain bowel diseases such as: diverticulitis, colitis and colon cancer, which has a high success rate for cure with surgical management when detected early.
The American Cancer Society has provided evidence in recent years which suggest that bowel cancer is caused by environmental agents such as: pesticides and herbicides sprayed on crops, hormones, and antibiotics fed to animals, and carcinogenic agents in the air we breath.
Periodic cleansing of the colon could minimize the exposure of these potential carcinogens to the colon wall.
The indications for colon hydrotherapy as determined by the physician include:
acute fecal impaction constipation or bloating
colitus diarrhea
parasitic infections atonic colon
mucus colitis fever therapy
hyper/hypothermia para/quadriplegic bowel training
flatulence hemorrhoids (mild)
intestinal toxemia nutrient supplementation
diverticulosis detox alcohol/drug units
preparation for Barium x-ray colonoscopy or surgery
Other indications, which require direct supervision by physician, are Diverticulitis, ulcerative colitis, Crohn's disease, on site preparation following trauma, and up to 4 months of pregnancy.
The contraindications for colon hydrotherapy include:
Severe cardiac disease, (uncontrolled HTN or CHF), aneurysm, severe anemia, GI hemorrhage or perforation, severe hemorrhoids, cirrhosis, carcinoma of the colon, fissures fistulas, advanced pregnancy, abdominal hernia, recent colon surgery or renal insufficiency.
Common Concerns about Colon Hydrotherapy:
Laxatives vs. Colon Hydrotherapy
Laxatives act as chemical irritants and stimulate the muscular walls of the colon to abnormally contract to expel the irritating substances. It is very easy to become dependent upon these drugs.
The oral route of administration is the least optimal method of evacuation of the large intestine. Very important digestive processes occurring higher up in the alimentary tract (stomach and small intestine) are interfered with. Most laxatives and other cathartics precipitate dehydration in the patient.
Colon hydrotherapy alternately fills and empties the colon and would improve the hydration status of the patient.
What about possible electrolyte depletion in the colon?
When the body is properly nourished with good quality organic foods containing sodium, potassium and magnesium, the electrolyte level of the colon is replenished as part of the diet.
Will the intestinal flora be disturbed by Colon Hydrotherapy?
The large intestine is producing bacteria on a daily basis and adherence to proper nutrition will enhance the colon's ability to maintain balance following colon hydrotherapy. The physician may elect to prescribe lacto acidophilus/bacillus culture to facilitate this process or incorporate low fat dairy products (yogurt, etc.) into the patient's dietary program.
What about possible contamination?
Following a colon hydrotherapy treatment, the instrument is thoroughly cleansed and disinfected. A potent germicidal solution is used to properly disinfect the instrument and its contents are not harmful to the colon environment. When the disinfecting procedure is completed, the instrument is generously cleaned with water to flush the germicidal solution completely from the colon hydrotherapy instrument.
What about possible perforation of the colon?
Modern instruments can introduce a minimal starting pressure of 1/8 - 1/4 psi, which produces one pint of water per minute flow. The treatment, then, can be performed effectively, below the 1 psi setting (in contrast to a standard hospital enema, which starts as 2 psi and increases another psi per foot of elevation.
Colon Hydrotherapy as a preparation method?
Colon hydrotherapy offers valuable application as a preparation method for diagnostic study of the large intestine. The superior preparation would provide an optimal study (x-ray, sigmoidoscopy, and colonoscopy) and allow for a more accurate diagnosis. The procedure would minimize the incidence of improperly prepared patients and the need for repeat studies, which represents a significant cost factor, as well as in the case of Barium Enema, additional radiation exposure to the patient.
Over $400 million is spent annually on laxatives in the U.S.
Patient discomfort resulting from retained barium could be avoided utilizing colon hydrotherapy cleansing of the barium solution. Following the x-ray study, colon hydrotherapy would eliminate the problem of residual opaque material in subsequent upper GI series of plain film studies.
Finally, improved quality of the preparation preceding barium implantation may decrease the risk of perforation at the time of administration. In the specialty of gastroenterology, colon hydrotherapy would provide optimal preparation for sigmoidoscopy/colonoscopy and maximize the physician's timetable.
Colon hydrotherapy would also function as a valuable preparation for gastrointestinal surgery. This colon cleansing system would provide a more optimal surgical field and potentially decrease the risk of postoperative complications
Good health is as much a function of our elimination status as the quality of food we ingest. Consider that over 400 million dollars is spent annually on laxatives in the United States.
Every year 140,000 Americans are diagnosed as having colorectal cancer. Of this population, 44% will die as a result of the disease.
Colon cancer is the second leading cancer killer in the U.S., following lung cancer in men and breast cancer in women. At least two million suffer from colitis, ileitis and diverticulitis, and 100,000 have a colostomy each year.
Periodic cleansing could minimize the exposure of potential carcinogens to colon walls. The colon hydrotherapy procedure allows the opportunity for digital rectal examination. At this time a hemocult smear (persons over 30) could be obtained, and a screening method for the detection of colorectal cancer observed. Periodic cleansing could dilute the toxin concentration in the cecum and facilitate the removal of same.
The result is a reduced load on the portal and lymphatic system allowing the five eliminative organs to the body to balance the removal of these toxins with their production. When a breakdown in one or more of these systems exists and toxins abound, the potential for disease is greatly increased.
Research has shown a definite correlation between the nature of the diet and type of flora in the intestine. A diet high in protein results in predominantly proteolytic putrefactive bacteria, which produce toxic compounds, some of which are absorbed. Alteration of the physiologic Flora (balanced) can predispose to some 36 bacterial toxins. The physiologic (normal) Flora consists of 30 - 40% gram negative bacillus and over 30% acidophilus. The pathogenic Flora consists of streptococus, staphylococcus, E. coli, etc., which are present normally in small numbers.
When conditions exist that alter this proposed balance, the pathogenic Flora can flourish and be a source of disease.
Small amounts of protein, fats and carbohydrates escaping digestion in the small intestine may be digested by bacterial enzymes in the large intestine. These organisms are capable of breaking down (cellulose) and synthesize folic acid and other B vitamins, as well as vitamin K. E. coli has recently been recognized as being able to split triglycerides (fatty acids). Certain amino acids: tryptophan, tyrosine, phenylalanine and histidine under bacterial enzyme influence produce the toxic compounds: skatole, indole, phenol, cresol, histamine, etc.
The products of putrefaction may be absorbed in small quantities by the mucosa and transported to the liver, where they are detoxified to be excreted by the kidney in the form of sulfates and glucuronides. The material which remains in the colon and is eliminated in the feces contain indole, skatole, mercaptan, hydrogen sulfide and bacterial end products of cystine, which gives the feces an unpleasant odor. The color of the feces is due to bacterial action on stercobilin (bile pigment).
Some ammonia is formed by bacteria in the intestine, mainly from digestive products of proteins and converted to urea in the liver. In liver disease such as cirrhosis, increased levels of ammonia in the vascular system can cause neurological symptoms resembling hepatic coma. A low protein diet may ameliorate these systems.
Cleansing the colon serves to dilute and remove the toxin concentration in the large intestine and respective blood supply. Speculation has been made that a change in diet from high protein to high carbohydrate results in dominance of a non-putrefactive Flora.
Other evidence implies that the ingestion of fermentable carbohydrates (glucose, fructose, lactose) results in delay of or complete inhibition of the putrefactive process. The liver is the main detoxification organ of the body. The portal vein drains the gastrointestinal tract, gall bladder, pancreas and spleen. The blood retrieved from the stomach and intestines is not returned to the heart but shunted to the liver where portal blood is discharged into sinusoids of the liver, which are surrounded by liver cells. In addition to removing, altering, storing and delivering the body digested fats, carbohydrates, proteins, vitamins and minerals, hepatocyte (liver cells) would detoxify and toxic material present and remove them from the system.
The problem arises when toxins are present in too great a number to be adequately handled by the liver. As with any organ or system in the body, the liver has a certain capacity for performing these functions of metabolism. When an unusual burden is placed on any one system, a breakdown occurs which affects the body as a whole.
This breakdown results in an increased absorption of toxic substances, and if left uncollected the body will poison itself (autointoxication).
Intestinal cleansing is a therapeutic measure, which addresses the cause or source of the problem. Other measures, which treat only the symptoms, will provide only temporary relief of the problem. Colon hydrotherapy could clean and dilute the toxin load in the large intestine, resulting in a reduced burden on the liver, allowing the eliminative organs to function optimally.
Colon hydrotherapy could also prevent stagnation and minimize the exposure of carcinogenic agents to the colon wall. The above combined effect may serve to rejuvenate the immunological system and truly be a pathway to vibrant health!
References for this article will be supplied upon request.
About the author: Tony Centracchio, P.A., is a graduate of Cornell Medical College who has devoted years of research to upgrading and refining the technology of today's colon hydrotherapy instrumentation and who is closely associated with Dotolo Research. All editorials are submitted to our editorial board for review. Each article published is selected for its technical merit and overall excellence. Reproduced in its entirety from the October 1986 issue of "The American Chiropractor."
http://colonhealth.net/colon_hydrotherapy/forgottenart4.htm
Processed vs. Natural Juices
This is a quick look at the differences between processed (canned or bottled) juices and fresh, natural juices that is made with your juice machine.
Processed Juices
Bottle juice is pasteurized and the nutrients are depleted.
Juices made from imported produce may carry traces of banned pesticides.
Juices from fruit concentrates do not contain the whole fruits and they may be nothing more than sugar water -- possibly made with chemicals in water from industrial sites.
Acids from juices can leech metal from cans, causing canned juice to spoil.
Wax and other chemicals found in juice containers can taint the juice.
Shrink-wrapped juice cartons come under high heat that depletes enzymes in juice.
Natural Juices made at home
Natural juices contain all the vitamins, minerals, fluids, enzymes, amino acids and chlorophyll (with no toxic additives) found in raw vegetables - thereby helping the body by:
Promoting growth and development
Assisting with digestion
Providing energy
Protecting against oxidation
Renewing cells
Enriching Blood
Benefits of juice
People with difficulty chewing can intake raw vegetables in juice form.
People to busy to eat a meal with vegetables can obtain the nourishment of a salad by drinking fresh juice.
Juice is easy on the stomach.
Drinking juice enables one to have more of a vegetable's nutrients than one would have by eating.
Juice is a good alternative for people who lack appetites.
Juice is a great nutrient source for babies and children who otherwise may not want vegetables.
Juice can help prevent acne in teenagers
We always recommend juicing organic fruits and vegetables whenever possible.
http://www.discountjuicers.com/naturaljuices.html
Processed Juices
Bottle juice is pasteurized and the nutrients are depleted.
Juices made from imported produce may carry traces of banned pesticides.
Juices from fruit concentrates do not contain the whole fruits and they may be nothing more than sugar water -- possibly made with chemicals in water from industrial sites.
Acids from juices can leech metal from cans, causing canned juice to spoil.
Wax and other chemicals found in juice containers can taint the juice.
Shrink-wrapped juice cartons come under high heat that depletes enzymes in juice.
Natural Juices made at home
Natural juices contain all the vitamins, minerals, fluids, enzymes, amino acids and chlorophyll (with no toxic additives) found in raw vegetables - thereby helping the body by:
Promoting growth and development
Assisting with digestion
Providing energy
Protecting against oxidation
Renewing cells
Enriching Blood
Benefits of juice
People with difficulty chewing can intake raw vegetables in juice form.
People to busy to eat a meal with vegetables can obtain the nourishment of a salad by drinking fresh juice.
Juice is easy on the stomach.
Drinking juice enables one to have more of a vegetable's nutrients than one would have by eating.
Juice is a good alternative for people who lack appetites.
Juice is a great nutrient source for babies and children who otherwise may not want vegetables.
Juice can help prevent acne in teenagers
We always recommend juicing organic fruits and vegetables whenever possible.
http://www.discountjuicers.com/naturaljuices.html
What would you expect to find in a product with the word ?natural? on the label? ~ Dr. Vic Shayne
Let’s say you’re concerned about eating foods that may poison you or lead to some debilitating or life-altering (not in a good way) illness. So you do a little research and find out that human-made chemicals cause cancer, skin problems, brain diseases, headaches and other maladies. You decide to make a serious effort to avoid as many artificial chemicals as you can, from your mouthwash to your toilet paper to your ice cream. You go to the food store and see the word ‘natural‘ on the labels and surmise that you’ve discovered an innocuous product. Think again.
Food and personal products manufacturers are using the word ‘natural’ to describe their ingredients on labels, advertising and displays. But with a little critical thinking, you’ll quickly realize that the word ‘natural’ must not mean what you thought (or hoped or assumed) it should. Worse, there are no guarantees or protective measures on the part of regulating bodies of the government, such as the FDA, to assure that what is called natural is indeed natural.
Some vitamins are called natural, but is there such a thing as a vitamin tree or vitamin bush? No, because vitamins are found in foods in their natural state. If they are alone or in isolation, such as in a pill, then they are no longer really natural. If it’s not in its natural state, how can it be called natural? How about all-natural cookies? If ingredients are grown with artificial pesticides and fertilizers, what’s natural about that? Sometimes natural products seem natural because you don’t see any chemical names listed on the label. Look closer.
Organic Consumers Association reports, “To put it bluntly, ‘natural,’ in the overwhelming majority of cases is meaningless, even though most consumers do not fully understand this. Natural, in other words, means conventional, with a green veneer. Natural products are routinely produced using pesticides, chemical fertilizer, hormones, genetic engineering, and sewage sludge. Natural or conventional products-whether produce, dairy, or canned or frozen goods are typically produced on large industrial farms or in processing plants that are highly polluting, chemical-intensive and energy-intensive. ‘Natural,’ ‘all-natural,’ and ’sustainable,’ products in most cases are neither backed up by rules and regulations, nor a Third Party certifier.”*
While every year or so we hear some report about how some university or lab is about to turn the corner on the fight against cancer, these same groups remain oblivious (or choose to ignore) to the connection between artificial chemicals and the decline of human health. There’s plenty of literature out in the cosmos to verify this connection, which is one of the biggest reasons people have been going green, eating organic and biodynamic foods and using cleaner personal care products, paints and the like.
In The Secret History of the War on Cancer, environmental-health expert and director of the Center for
Environmental Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Devra Davis, warns that we’re ignoring dozens of cancer-causing chemicals, like asbestos, benzene, vinyl chloride, and dioxin. She writes that the chemical industry has managed to obfuscate the carcinogenic dangers of chemical and other toxic waste.** I would add to this that the media also fails to provide this kind of link in their news broadcasts.
In researching my own book, Evil Genius in the Garden of Eden, I found enough material to portray the ugly link between chemicals, corporations, disease and profit-making to make Rachel Carson’s eyes spin. If you really care about getting the lion’s share of toxic chemicals out of your life, don’t depend on the word ‘natural’ to get you there.
*Cummins, Ronnie, The Organic Monopoly and the Myth of “Natural” Foods: How Industry Giants Are Undermining the Organic Movement, Organic Consumers Association, July 8, 2009
** Davis, Devra, Chemicals, Cancer and You, npr.org, Oct 4, 07
For the last 20 years, Dr. Vic Shayne has been involved in nutritional research, both personally and professionally. He’s written several books on the importance of foods and how their nutrients differ from isolates found in vitamin pills. Health is not something we can take for granted.
Visit his website to learn more.
http://www.elephantjournal.com/2010/04/what-would-you-expect-to-find-in-a-product-with-the-word-natural-on-the-label-dr-vic-shayne/
Food and personal products manufacturers are using the word ‘natural’ to describe their ingredients on labels, advertising and displays. But with a little critical thinking, you’ll quickly realize that the word ‘natural’ must not mean what you thought (or hoped or assumed) it should. Worse, there are no guarantees or protective measures on the part of regulating bodies of the government, such as the FDA, to assure that what is called natural is indeed natural.
Some vitamins are called natural, but is there such a thing as a vitamin tree or vitamin bush? No, because vitamins are found in foods in their natural state. If they are alone or in isolation, such as in a pill, then they are no longer really natural. If it’s not in its natural state, how can it be called natural? How about all-natural cookies? If ingredients are grown with artificial pesticides and fertilizers, what’s natural about that? Sometimes natural products seem natural because you don’t see any chemical names listed on the label. Look closer.
Organic Consumers Association reports, “To put it bluntly, ‘natural,’ in the overwhelming majority of cases is meaningless, even though most consumers do not fully understand this. Natural, in other words, means conventional, with a green veneer. Natural products are routinely produced using pesticides, chemical fertilizer, hormones, genetic engineering, and sewage sludge. Natural or conventional products-whether produce, dairy, or canned or frozen goods are typically produced on large industrial farms or in processing plants that are highly polluting, chemical-intensive and energy-intensive. ‘Natural,’ ‘all-natural,’ and ’sustainable,’ products in most cases are neither backed up by rules and regulations, nor a Third Party certifier.”*
While every year or so we hear some report about how some university or lab is about to turn the corner on the fight against cancer, these same groups remain oblivious (or choose to ignore) to the connection between artificial chemicals and the decline of human health. There’s plenty of literature out in the cosmos to verify this connection, which is one of the biggest reasons people have been going green, eating organic and biodynamic foods and using cleaner personal care products, paints and the like.
In The Secret History of the War on Cancer, environmental-health expert and director of the Center for
Environmental Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Devra Davis, warns that we’re ignoring dozens of cancer-causing chemicals, like asbestos, benzene, vinyl chloride, and dioxin. She writes that the chemical industry has managed to obfuscate the carcinogenic dangers of chemical and other toxic waste.** I would add to this that the media also fails to provide this kind of link in their news broadcasts.
In researching my own book, Evil Genius in the Garden of Eden, I found enough material to portray the ugly link between chemicals, corporations, disease and profit-making to make Rachel Carson’s eyes spin. If you really care about getting the lion’s share of toxic chemicals out of your life, don’t depend on the word ‘natural’ to get you there.
*Cummins, Ronnie, The Organic Monopoly and the Myth of “Natural” Foods: How Industry Giants Are Undermining the Organic Movement, Organic Consumers Association, July 8, 2009
** Davis, Devra, Chemicals, Cancer and You, npr.org, Oct 4, 07
For the last 20 years, Dr. Vic Shayne has been involved in nutritional research, both personally and professionally. He’s written several books on the importance of foods and how their nutrients differ from isolates found in vitamin pills. Health is not something we can take for granted.
Visit his website to learn more.
http://www.elephantjournal.com/2010/04/what-would-you-expect-to-find-in-a-product-with-the-word-natural-on-the-label-dr-vic-shayne/
Key Risk Factors for Colorectal Cancer
What Are the Risk Factors for Colorectal Cancer?
A risk factor is anything that affects your chance of getting a disease such as cancer. Different cancers have different risk factors. For example, exposing skin to strong sunlight is a risk factor for skin cancer. Smoking is a risk factor for cancers of the lungs, larynx (voice box), mouth, throat, esophagus, kidneys, bladder, colon, and several other organs.
But risk factors don't tell us everything. Having a risk factor, or even several risk factors, does not mean that you will get the disease. And some people who get the disease may not have any known risk factors. Even if a person with colorectal cancer has a risk factor, it is often very hard to know how much that risk factor may have contributed to the cancer.
Researchers have found several risk factors that may increase a person's chance of developing colorectal polyps or colorectal cancer.
Risk factors you cannot change
Age
Younger adults can develop colorectal cancer, but the chances increase markedly after age 50. More than 9 out of 10 people diagnosed with colorectal cancer are older than 50.
Personal history of colorectal polyps or colorectal cancer
If you have a history of adenomatous polyps (adenomas), you are at increased risk of developing colorectal cancer. This is especially true if the polyps are large or if there are many of them.
If you have had colorectal cancer, even though it has been completely removed, you are more likely to develop new cancers in other areas of the colon and rectum. The chances of this happening are greater if you had your first colorectal cancer when you were younger.
Personal history of inflammatory bowel disease
Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), which includes ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease, is a condition in which the colon is inflamed over a long period of time. People who have had IBD for many years often develop dysplasia. Dysplasia is a term used to describe cells in the lining of the colon or rectum that look abnormal (but not like true cancer cells) when viewed under a microscope. These cells can change into cancer over time.
If you have IBD, your risk of developing colorectal cancer is increased, and you may need to be screened for colorectal cancer starting at an earlier age and on a more frequent basis (see the section, "Can colorectal cancer be found early?").
Inflammatory bowel disease is different from irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), which does not carry an increased risk for colorectal cancer.
Family history of colorectal cancer
Most colorectal cancers occur in people without a family history of colorectal cancer. Still, as many as 1 in 5 people who develop colorectal cancer have other family members who have been affected by this disease.
People with a history of colorectal cancer or adenomatous polyps in one or more first-degree relatives (parents, siblings, or children) are at increased risk. The risk is about doubled in those with a single affected first-degree relative. It is even higher if the first-degree relative is diagnosed at a young age, or if more than one first-degree relative is affected.
The reasons for the increased risk are not clear in all cases. Cancers can "run in the family" because of inherited genes, shared environmental factors, or some combination of these.
If you have a family history of adenomatous polyps or colorectal cancer, you should talk with your doctor about the possible need to begin screening before age 50. If you have had adenomatous polyps or colorectal cancer, it's important to tell your close relatives so that they can pass along that information to their doctors and start screening at the right age.
Inherited syndromes
About 5% to 10% of people who develop colorectal cancer have inherited gene changes that cause the disease. The 2 most common inherited syndromes linked with colorectal cancers are familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) and hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC).
Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP): FAP is caused by changes (mutations) in the APC gene that a person inherits from his or her parents. About 1% of all colorectal cancers are due to FAP.
People with this disease typically develop hundreds or thousands of polyps in their colon and rectum, usually in their teens or early adulthood. Cancer usually develops in 1 or more of these polyps as early as age 20. By age 40, almost all people with this disorder will have developed cancer if preventive surgery (removing the colon) is not done.
FAP is sometimes associated with Gardner syndrome, a condition that also involves benign (non-cancerous) tumors of the skin, soft connective tissue, and bones.
Hereditary non-polyposis colon cancer (HNPCC): HNPCC, also known as Lynch syndrome, accounts for about 3% to 5% of all colorectal cancers. HNPCC can be caused by inherited changes in a number of different genes that normally help repair DNA damage. (See the section, "Do we know what causes colorectal cancer?" for more details.)
This syndrome also develops when people are relatively young. People with HNPCC have polyps, but they only have a few, not hundreds as in FAP. The lifetime risk of colorectal cancer in people with this condition may be as high as 80%.
Women with this condition also have a very high risk of developing cancer of the endometrium (lining of the uterus). Other cancers linked with HNPCC include cancer of the ovary, stomach, small bowel, pancreas, kidney, brain, ureters (tubes that carry urine from the kidneys to the bladder), and bile duct.
For more information on HNPCC, see the sections, "Do we know what causes colorectal cancer?" and "Can colorectal cancer be prevented?"
Turcot syndrome: This is a rare inherited condition in which people are at increased risk of adenomatous polyps and colorectal cancer, as well as brain tumors. There are actually 2 types of
Turcot syndrome:
One can be caused by gene changes similar to those seen in FAP, in which cases the brain tumors are medulloblastomas.
The other can also be caused by gene changes similar to those seen in HNPCC, in which cases the brain tumors are glioblastomas.
Peutz-Jeghers syndrome: People with this rare inherited condition tend to have freckles around the mouth (and sometimes on the hands and feet) and large polyps in their digestive tracts. They are at greatly increased risk for colorectal cancer, as well as several other cancers, which usually appear at a younger than normal age.
Identifying families with these inherited syndromes is important because it allows doctors to recommend specific steps, such as screening and other preventive measures, at an early age.
Several types of cancer can be linked with these syndromes, so it's important to check your family medical history for polyps or any type of cancer. If you have had adenomatous polyps or cancer, it's important to tell your close relatives. People with a family history of colorectal polyps or cancer should consider genetic counseling to review their family medical tree and determine whether genetic testing may be right for them. If needed, this can help them decide about getting screened and treated at an early age. More information on genetic counseling and testing can be found in the section, "Can colorectal cancer be prevented?"
Racial and ethnic background
African Americans have the highest colorectal cancer incidence and mortality rates of all racial groups in the United States. The reasons for this are not yet understood.
Jews of Eastern European descent (Ashkenazi Jews) have one of the highest colorectal cancer risks of any ethnic group in the world. Several gene mutations leading to an increased risk of colorectal cancer have been found in this group. The most common of these DNA changes, called the I1307K APC mutation, is present in about 6% of American Jews.
Lifestyle-related factors
Several lifestyle-related factors have been linked to colorectal cancer. In fact, the links between diet, weight, and exercise and colorectal cancer risk are some of the strongest for any type of cancer.
Certain types of diets
A diet that is high in red meats (beef, lamb, or liver) and processed meats (hot dogs and some luncheon meats) can increase colorectal cancer risk. Cooking meats at very high temperatures (frying, broiling, or grilling) creates chemicals that might increase cancer risk, but it's not clear how much this might contribute to an increase in colorectal cancer risk. Diets high in vegetables and fruits have been linked with a decreased risk of colorectal cancer. It's not clear if other dietary components (fiber, certain types of fats, etc.) affect colorectal cancer risk.
Physical inactivity
If you are not physically active, you have a greater chance of developing colorectal cancer. Increasing activity may help reduce your risk.
Obesity
If you are very overweight, your risk of developing and dying from colorectal cancer is increased. Obesity raises the risk of colon cancer in both men and women, but the link seems to be stronger in men.
Smoking
Long-term smokers are more likely than non-smokers to develop and die from colorectal cancer. Smoking is a well-known cause of lung cancer, but some of the cancer-causing substances are swallowed and can cause digestive system cancers, like colorectal cancer.
Heavy alcohol use
Colorectal cancer has been linked to the heavy use of alcohol. At least some of this may be due to the fact that heavy alcohol users tend to have low levels of folic acid in the body. Still, alcohol use should be limited to no more than 2 drinks a day for men and 1 drink a day for women.
Type 2 diabetes
People with type 2 (usually non-insulin dependent) diabetes have an increased risk of developing colorectal cancer. Both type 2 diabetes and colorectal cancer share some of the same risk factors (such as excess weight). But even after taking these into account, people with type 2 diabetes still have an increased risk. They also tend to have a less favorable prognosis (outlook) after diagnosis.
Factors with uncertain, controversial, or unproven effects on colorectal cancer
Night shift work
Results of one study suggested working a night shift at least 3 nights a month for at least 15 years may increase the risk of colorectal cancer in women. The study authors suggested this might be due to changes in levels of melatonin (a hormone that responds to changes in light) in the body. More research is needed to confirm or refute this finding.
Previous treatment for certain cancers
Some studies have found that men who survive testicular cancer seem to have a higher rate of colorectal cancer and some other cancers. This might be due to the treatments they have received.
Several studies have suggested that men who received radiation therapy to treat prostate cancer may have a higher risk of rectal cancer because the rectum receives some radiation during treatment.
Most of these studies are based on men treated in the 1980s and 1990s, and the effect of more modern radiation methods on rectal cancer risk is not clear. There are many possible side effects of prostate cancer treatment that men should consider when making treatment decisions. Some doctors recommend that the risk of rectal cancer should be considered as one of those possible side effects.
The American Cancer Society and several other medical organizations recommend earlier screening for people with increased colorectal cancer risk. These recommendations differ from those for people at average risk. For more information, speak with your doctor and refer to the table in the "Can colorectal polyps and cancer be found early?" section of this document.
Last Medical Review: 02/16/2010
Last Revised: 02/16/2010
http://www.cancer.org/docroot/CRI/content/CRI_2_4_2X_What_are_the_risk_factors_for_colon_and_rectum_cancer.asp?rnav=cri
A risk factor is anything that affects your chance of getting a disease such as cancer. Different cancers have different risk factors. For example, exposing skin to strong sunlight is a risk factor for skin cancer. Smoking is a risk factor for cancers of the lungs, larynx (voice box), mouth, throat, esophagus, kidneys, bladder, colon, and several other organs.
But risk factors don't tell us everything. Having a risk factor, or even several risk factors, does not mean that you will get the disease. And some people who get the disease may not have any known risk factors. Even if a person with colorectal cancer has a risk factor, it is often very hard to know how much that risk factor may have contributed to the cancer.
Researchers have found several risk factors that may increase a person's chance of developing colorectal polyps or colorectal cancer.
Risk factors you cannot change
Age
Younger adults can develop colorectal cancer, but the chances increase markedly after age 50. More than 9 out of 10 people diagnosed with colorectal cancer are older than 50.
Personal history of colorectal polyps or colorectal cancer
If you have a history of adenomatous polyps (adenomas), you are at increased risk of developing colorectal cancer. This is especially true if the polyps are large or if there are many of them.
If you have had colorectal cancer, even though it has been completely removed, you are more likely to develop new cancers in other areas of the colon and rectum. The chances of this happening are greater if you had your first colorectal cancer when you were younger.
Personal history of inflammatory bowel disease
Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), which includes ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease, is a condition in which the colon is inflamed over a long period of time. People who have had IBD for many years often develop dysplasia. Dysplasia is a term used to describe cells in the lining of the colon or rectum that look abnormal (but not like true cancer cells) when viewed under a microscope. These cells can change into cancer over time.
If you have IBD, your risk of developing colorectal cancer is increased, and you may need to be screened for colorectal cancer starting at an earlier age and on a more frequent basis (see the section, "Can colorectal cancer be found early?").
Inflammatory bowel disease is different from irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), which does not carry an increased risk for colorectal cancer.
Family history of colorectal cancer
Most colorectal cancers occur in people without a family history of colorectal cancer. Still, as many as 1 in 5 people who develop colorectal cancer have other family members who have been affected by this disease.
People with a history of colorectal cancer or adenomatous polyps in one or more first-degree relatives (parents, siblings, or children) are at increased risk. The risk is about doubled in those with a single affected first-degree relative. It is even higher if the first-degree relative is diagnosed at a young age, or if more than one first-degree relative is affected.
The reasons for the increased risk are not clear in all cases. Cancers can "run in the family" because of inherited genes, shared environmental factors, or some combination of these.
If you have a family history of adenomatous polyps or colorectal cancer, you should talk with your doctor about the possible need to begin screening before age 50. If you have had adenomatous polyps or colorectal cancer, it's important to tell your close relatives so that they can pass along that information to their doctors and start screening at the right age.
Inherited syndromes
About 5% to 10% of people who develop colorectal cancer have inherited gene changes that cause the disease. The 2 most common inherited syndromes linked with colorectal cancers are familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) and hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC).
Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP): FAP is caused by changes (mutations) in the APC gene that a person inherits from his or her parents. About 1% of all colorectal cancers are due to FAP.
People with this disease typically develop hundreds or thousands of polyps in their colon and rectum, usually in their teens or early adulthood. Cancer usually develops in 1 or more of these polyps as early as age 20. By age 40, almost all people with this disorder will have developed cancer if preventive surgery (removing the colon) is not done.
FAP is sometimes associated with Gardner syndrome, a condition that also involves benign (non-cancerous) tumors of the skin, soft connective tissue, and bones.
Hereditary non-polyposis colon cancer (HNPCC): HNPCC, also known as Lynch syndrome, accounts for about 3% to 5% of all colorectal cancers. HNPCC can be caused by inherited changes in a number of different genes that normally help repair DNA damage. (See the section, "Do we know what causes colorectal cancer?" for more details.)
This syndrome also develops when people are relatively young. People with HNPCC have polyps, but they only have a few, not hundreds as in FAP. The lifetime risk of colorectal cancer in people with this condition may be as high as 80%.
Women with this condition also have a very high risk of developing cancer of the endometrium (lining of the uterus). Other cancers linked with HNPCC include cancer of the ovary, stomach, small bowel, pancreas, kidney, brain, ureters (tubes that carry urine from the kidneys to the bladder), and bile duct.
For more information on HNPCC, see the sections, "Do we know what causes colorectal cancer?" and "Can colorectal cancer be prevented?"
Turcot syndrome: This is a rare inherited condition in which people are at increased risk of adenomatous polyps and colorectal cancer, as well as brain tumors. There are actually 2 types of
Turcot syndrome:
One can be caused by gene changes similar to those seen in FAP, in which cases the brain tumors are medulloblastomas.
The other can also be caused by gene changes similar to those seen in HNPCC, in which cases the brain tumors are glioblastomas.
Peutz-Jeghers syndrome: People with this rare inherited condition tend to have freckles around the mouth (and sometimes on the hands and feet) and large polyps in their digestive tracts. They are at greatly increased risk for colorectal cancer, as well as several other cancers, which usually appear at a younger than normal age.
Identifying families with these inherited syndromes is important because it allows doctors to recommend specific steps, such as screening and other preventive measures, at an early age.
Several types of cancer can be linked with these syndromes, so it's important to check your family medical history for polyps or any type of cancer. If you have had adenomatous polyps or cancer, it's important to tell your close relatives. People with a family history of colorectal polyps or cancer should consider genetic counseling to review their family medical tree and determine whether genetic testing may be right for them. If needed, this can help them decide about getting screened and treated at an early age. More information on genetic counseling and testing can be found in the section, "Can colorectal cancer be prevented?"
Racial and ethnic background
African Americans have the highest colorectal cancer incidence and mortality rates of all racial groups in the United States. The reasons for this are not yet understood.
Jews of Eastern European descent (Ashkenazi Jews) have one of the highest colorectal cancer risks of any ethnic group in the world. Several gene mutations leading to an increased risk of colorectal cancer have been found in this group. The most common of these DNA changes, called the I1307K APC mutation, is present in about 6% of American Jews.
Lifestyle-related factors
Several lifestyle-related factors have been linked to colorectal cancer. In fact, the links between diet, weight, and exercise and colorectal cancer risk are some of the strongest for any type of cancer.
Certain types of diets
A diet that is high in red meats (beef, lamb, or liver) and processed meats (hot dogs and some luncheon meats) can increase colorectal cancer risk. Cooking meats at very high temperatures (frying, broiling, or grilling) creates chemicals that might increase cancer risk, but it's not clear how much this might contribute to an increase in colorectal cancer risk. Diets high in vegetables and fruits have been linked with a decreased risk of colorectal cancer. It's not clear if other dietary components (fiber, certain types of fats, etc.) affect colorectal cancer risk.
Physical inactivity
If you are not physically active, you have a greater chance of developing colorectal cancer. Increasing activity may help reduce your risk.
Obesity
If you are very overweight, your risk of developing and dying from colorectal cancer is increased. Obesity raises the risk of colon cancer in both men and women, but the link seems to be stronger in men.
Smoking
Long-term smokers are more likely than non-smokers to develop and die from colorectal cancer. Smoking is a well-known cause of lung cancer, but some of the cancer-causing substances are swallowed and can cause digestive system cancers, like colorectal cancer.
Heavy alcohol use
Colorectal cancer has been linked to the heavy use of alcohol. At least some of this may be due to the fact that heavy alcohol users tend to have low levels of folic acid in the body. Still, alcohol use should be limited to no more than 2 drinks a day for men and 1 drink a day for women.
Type 2 diabetes
People with type 2 (usually non-insulin dependent) diabetes have an increased risk of developing colorectal cancer. Both type 2 diabetes and colorectal cancer share some of the same risk factors (such as excess weight). But even after taking these into account, people with type 2 diabetes still have an increased risk. They also tend to have a less favorable prognosis (outlook) after diagnosis.
Factors with uncertain, controversial, or unproven effects on colorectal cancer
Night shift work
Results of one study suggested working a night shift at least 3 nights a month for at least 15 years may increase the risk of colorectal cancer in women. The study authors suggested this might be due to changes in levels of melatonin (a hormone that responds to changes in light) in the body. More research is needed to confirm or refute this finding.
Previous treatment for certain cancers
Some studies have found that men who survive testicular cancer seem to have a higher rate of colorectal cancer and some other cancers. This might be due to the treatments they have received.
Several studies have suggested that men who received radiation therapy to treat prostate cancer may have a higher risk of rectal cancer because the rectum receives some radiation during treatment.
Most of these studies are based on men treated in the 1980s and 1990s, and the effect of more modern radiation methods on rectal cancer risk is not clear. There are many possible side effects of prostate cancer treatment that men should consider when making treatment decisions. Some doctors recommend that the risk of rectal cancer should be considered as one of those possible side effects.
The American Cancer Society and several other medical organizations recommend earlier screening for people with increased colorectal cancer risk. These recommendations differ from those for people at average risk. For more information, speak with your doctor and refer to the table in the "Can colorectal polyps and cancer be found early?" section of this document.
Last Medical Review: 02/16/2010
Last Revised: 02/16/2010
http://www.cancer.org/docroot/CRI/content/CRI_2_4_2X_What_are_the_risk_factors_for_colon_and_rectum_cancer.asp?rnav=cri
What would you expect to find in a product with the word ‘natural’ on the label?
What would you expect to find in a product with the word ‘natural’ on the label? ~ Dr. Vic Shayne By elephantjournal.com on Apr 13, 2010
Let’s say you’re concerned about eating foods that may poison you or lead to some debilitating or life-altering (not in a good way) illness. So you do a little research and find out that human-made chemicals cause cancer, skin problems, brain diseases, headaches and other maladies. You decide to make a serious effort to avoid as many artificial chemicals as you can, from your mouthwash to your toilet paper to your ice cream. You go to the food store and see the word ‘natural‘ on the labels and surmise that you’ve discovered an innocuous product. Think again.
Food and personal products manufacturers are using the word ‘natural’ to describe their ingredients on labels, advertising and displays. But with a little critical thinking, you’ll quickly realize that the word ‘natural’ must not mean what you thought (or hoped or assumed) it should. Worse, there are no guarantees or protective measures on the part of regulating bodies of the government, such as the FDA, to assure that what is called natural is indeed natural.
Some vitamins are called natural, but is there such a thing as a vitamin tree or vitamin bush? No, because vitamins are found in foods in their natural state. If they are alone or in isolation, such as in a pill, then they are no longer really natural. If it’s not in its natural state, how can it be called natural? How about all-natural cookies? If ingredients are grown with artificial pesticides and fertilizers, what’s natural about that? Sometimes natural products seem natural because you don’t see any chemical names listed on the label. Look closer.
Organic Consumers Association reports, “To put it bluntly, ‘natural,’ in the overwhelming majority of cases is meaningless, even though most consumers do not fully understand this. Natural, in other words, means conventional, with a green veneer. Natural products are routinely produced using pesticides, chemical fertilizer, hormones, genetic engineering, and sewage sludge. Natural or conventional products-whether produce, dairy, or canned or frozen goods are typically produced on large industrial farms or in processing plants that are highly polluting, chemical-intensive and energy-intensive. ‘Natural,’ ‘all-natural,’ and ’sustainable,’ products in most cases are neither backed up by rules and regulations, nor a Third Party certifier.”*
While every year or so we hear some report about how some university or lab is about to turn the corner on the fight against cancer, these same groups remain oblivious (or choose to ignore) to the connection between artificial chemicals and the decline of human health. There’s plenty of literature out in the cosmos to verify this connection, which is one of the biggest reasons people have been going green, eating organic and biodynamic foods and using cleaner personal care products, paints and the like.
In The Secret History of the War on Cancer, environmental-health expert and director of the Center for Environmental Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Devra Davis, warns that we’re ignoring dozens of cancer-causing chemicals, like asbestos, benzene, vinyl chloride, and dioxin. She writes that the chemical industry has managed to obfuscate the carcinogenic dangers of chemical and other toxic waste.** I would add to this that the media also fails to provide this kind of link in their news broadcasts.
In researching my own book, Evil Genius in the Garden of Eden, I found enough material to portray the ugly link between chemicals, corporations, disease and profit-making to make Rachel Carson’s eyes spin. If you really care about getting the lion’s share of toxic chemicals out of your life, don’t depend on the word ‘natural’ to get you there.
*Cummins, Ronnie, The Organic Monopoly and the Myth of “Natural” Foods: How Industry Giants Are Undermining the Organic Movement, Organic Consumers Association, July 8, 2009
** Davis, Devra, Chemicals, Cancer and You, npr.org, Oct 4, 07
For the last 20 years, Dr. Vic Shayne has been involved in nutritional research, both personally and professionally. He’s written several books on the importance of foods and how their nutrients differ from isolates found in vitamin pills. Health is not something we can take for granted.
Visit his website to learn more.
http://www.elephantjournal.com/2010/04/what-would-you-expect-to-find-in-a-product-with-the-word-natural-on-the-label-dr-vic-shayne/
Let’s say you’re concerned about eating foods that may poison you or lead to some debilitating or life-altering (not in a good way) illness. So you do a little research and find out that human-made chemicals cause cancer, skin problems, brain diseases, headaches and other maladies. You decide to make a serious effort to avoid as many artificial chemicals as you can, from your mouthwash to your toilet paper to your ice cream. You go to the food store and see the word ‘natural‘ on the labels and surmise that you’ve discovered an innocuous product. Think again.
Food and personal products manufacturers are using the word ‘natural’ to describe their ingredients on labels, advertising and displays. But with a little critical thinking, you’ll quickly realize that the word ‘natural’ must not mean what you thought (or hoped or assumed) it should. Worse, there are no guarantees or protective measures on the part of regulating bodies of the government, such as the FDA, to assure that what is called natural is indeed natural.
Some vitamins are called natural, but is there such a thing as a vitamin tree or vitamin bush? No, because vitamins are found in foods in their natural state. If they are alone or in isolation, such as in a pill, then they are no longer really natural. If it’s not in its natural state, how can it be called natural? How about all-natural cookies? If ingredients are grown with artificial pesticides and fertilizers, what’s natural about that? Sometimes natural products seem natural because you don’t see any chemical names listed on the label. Look closer.
Organic Consumers Association reports, “To put it bluntly, ‘natural,’ in the overwhelming majority of cases is meaningless, even though most consumers do not fully understand this. Natural, in other words, means conventional, with a green veneer. Natural products are routinely produced using pesticides, chemical fertilizer, hormones, genetic engineering, and sewage sludge. Natural or conventional products-whether produce, dairy, or canned or frozen goods are typically produced on large industrial farms or in processing plants that are highly polluting, chemical-intensive and energy-intensive. ‘Natural,’ ‘all-natural,’ and ’sustainable,’ products in most cases are neither backed up by rules and regulations, nor a Third Party certifier.”*
While every year or so we hear some report about how some university or lab is about to turn the corner on the fight against cancer, these same groups remain oblivious (or choose to ignore) to the connection between artificial chemicals and the decline of human health. There’s plenty of literature out in the cosmos to verify this connection, which is one of the biggest reasons people have been going green, eating organic and biodynamic foods and using cleaner personal care products, paints and the like.
In The Secret History of the War on Cancer, environmental-health expert and director of the Center for Environmental Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Devra Davis, warns that we’re ignoring dozens of cancer-causing chemicals, like asbestos, benzene, vinyl chloride, and dioxin. She writes that the chemical industry has managed to obfuscate the carcinogenic dangers of chemical and other toxic waste.** I would add to this that the media also fails to provide this kind of link in their news broadcasts.
In researching my own book, Evil Genius in the Garden of Eden, I found enough material to portray the ugly link between chemicals, corporations, disease and profit-making to make Rachel Carson’s eyes spin. If you really care about getting the lion’s share of toxic chemicals out of your life, don’t depend on the word ‘natural’ to get you there.
*Cummins, Ronnie, The Organic Monopoly and the Myth of “Natural” Foods: How Industry Giants Are Undermining the Organic Movement, Organic Consumers Association, July 8, 2009
** Davis, Devra, Chemicals, Cancer and You, npr.org, Oct 4, 07
For the last 20 years, Dr. Vic Shayne has been involved in nutritional research, both personally and professionally. He’s written several books on the importance of foods and how their nutrients differ from isolates found in vitamin pills. Health is not something we can take for granted.
Visit his website to learn more.
http://www.elephantjournal.com/2010/04/what-would-you-expect-to-find-in-a-product-with-the-word-natural-on-the-label-dr-vic-shayne/
Dairy: 6 Reasons You Should Avoid It at All Costs or Why Following the USDA Food Pyramid Guidelines is Bad for Your Health
Got milk?
These days, it seems like almost everybody does. Celebrities, athletes, and even former president Clinton's head of Health and Human Services, Donna Shalala, are all proud to wear the white "milk mustache." After all, everyone knows that you need milk to be healthy ...
Dairy is nature's perfect food -- but only if you're a calf.
If that sounds shocking to you, it's because very few people are willing to tell the truth about dairy. In fact, criticizing milk in America is like taking on motherhood, apple pie, or baseball. But that's just what I'm about to do.
Based on the research and my experience practicing medicine, I typically advise most of my patients to avoid dairy products completely. I like ice cream just as much as the next person, but as a scientist I have to look honestly at what we know. In today's blog I will explore many of the documented ill-effects of dairy, and give you six reasons you should avoid dairy at all costs.
The Reason I Have Problems with the USDA Food Pyramid
I'm aware that my advice to avoid dairy flies in the face of the new, "up-to-date" food pyramid from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). The USDA's pyramid recommends drinking 3 glasses of milk a day. What's wrong with that? Well, for one thing, it's not a recommendation that's based on strict science.
Some of the "experts" who helped create the pyramid actually work for the dairy industry, which makes the US Department of agriculture's recommendations reflect industry interests, not science or our best interests.
In fact, Walter Willett, M.D., Ph.D -- the second-most-cited scientist in all of clinical medicine and the head of nutrition at Harvard's School of Public Health -- is one of the pyramid's most vocal critics. He's even called its guidelines "udderly ridiculous." That's not something a Harvard scientist says lightly.
But Dr. Willett is right. The pyramid just isn't based on key scientific findings about health. In a moment we will take a look at some of the pyramid's recommendations and why I disagree with them.
But before I dissect why the current food pyramid is harmful to your health, I want to offer a bit of hope. I recently attended a medical conference put on by Harvard Medical School and the Culinary Institute of America called Healthy Kitchens, Healthy Lives and met Eric Rimm, who works closely with Walter Willett at Harvard School of Public Health and is a member of the 2010 USDA Dietary Guidelines for Americans Committee.
I asked him if he felt that science not industry would be shaping the new guidelines and he said there was only now one industry scientist on the new panel and he was objective and agreeable to make changes when presented the data. I am anxious to see how the science matches policy but feel a ray of hope that for the first time in the history of our dietary guidelines we will see science predominate, not industry interests and that the language will be direct, clear and simple to understand for all Americans. The guidelines from the early 1990's promoting the consumption of 6-11 servings of bread and cereals daily led to the pasta, carb, sugar generation and led to the largest epidemic of obesity in the history of our species.
Let's hope the new guidelines for 2010 will guide us toward greater health, not an increasing burden of obesity, diabetes and chronic disease. The USDA food policy guidelines form the basis of the school lunch program and it has contributed to a tripling of obesity in children. Let's hope we can serve up a different lunch menu for our children and our nation.
The simple idea that science should become policy is unfortunately one that has found little traction in Washington. But that seems to be shifting a little now.
Now back to why the last government guidelines from 2005 are harmful to your health!
1. Consume a variety of foods within and among the basic food groups while staying within your body's energy needs.
Sounds sensible -- but which food groups? If you choose dairy, meat, fats, and carbohydrates, the "perfect" meal could be a cheeseburger, milkshake, and fries with ketchup (potatoes and tomatoes are the two top vegetables consumed in America). Generic advice like that is pretty meaningless and potentially harmful.
2. Control your caloric intake to manage body weight.
Again, that sounds good, but as I wrote in my book UltraMetabolism, even the best-trained nutritionists and dietitians can't come close to correctly estimating their own caloric intake in a day. Also consider this: Is it okay to consume all of your calories from cola or ice cream as long as you stay within my caloric needs? Of course not. So this is more useless advice.
3. Increase intake of fruits and vegetables, whole grains, and nonfat or low-fat milk products.
Well, fruits, veggies, and whole grains are great. Milk -- not so much. I'll get back to that in a minute.
4. Choose carbohydrates wisely.
Who could argue with that? But how do they define "wisely"? The real advice here should be to cut down sugar intake from 185 pounds per person per year (what we currently consume) to less than a pound, avoid flour products (except as a treat), and stick to whole-food carbohydrates like vegetables, fruit, whole grains, beans, nuts, and seeds.
5. Choose to prepare food with little salt.
That's not bad advice. But it doesn't make sense if most of what you eat is packaged or processed foods that you don't actually prepare. For most Americans who eat half of their meals outside their homes, this isn't helpful. A better recommendation would be to avoid packaged, processed, canned, prepared, and fast foods (unless you know exactly how they are made).
6. If you drink alcoholic beverages, do so in moderation.
Sounds good -- but if you're usually drinking two bottles of wine a night, then one seems like moderation! I think a better suggestion is to limit your alcohol consumption to half a drink a day or 3 glasses a week (the amount that seems to have the most health benefit).
7. Don't eat unsafe foods.
Of course you shouldn't leave your egg salad out in the hot sun or toss your salad with hands that just handled raw chicken coated with salmonella. But the food pyramid guidelines don't mention pesticides, hormones, antibiotics, or genetically modified foods, despite scientific evidence of their harm. Shame on the USDA!
You can see now why I have big problems with the food pyramid! Its guidelines try to sound sensible -- while still protecting the interests of the food industry, the agriculture industry, and all of the lobbyists paying for the elections of the Congress. That way everybody's happy ...
But I'm not, and you shouldn't be either. The public just isn't served by this watered down, confusing, and useless pyramid. The next guidelines, I hope will be better, especially with independent scientists like Eric Rimm involved. Worse, some of the recommendations are downright harmful --like the one to drink more milk and dairy products.
The Truth about Dairy
According to Dr. Willett, who has done many studies and reviewed the research on this topic, there are many reasons to pass up milk, including:
1. Milk doesn't reduce fractures.(i) Contrary to popular belief, eating dairy products has never been shown to reduce fracture risk. In fact, according to the Nurses' Health Study dairy may increase risk of fractures by 50 percent!
2. Less dairy, better bones. Countries with lowest rates of dairy and calcium consumption (like those in Africa and Asia) have the lowest rates of osteoporosis.
3. Calcium isn't as bone-protective as we thought.(ii) Studies of calcium supplementation have shown no benefit in reducing fracture risk. Vitamin D appears to be much more important than calcium in preventing fractures.
4. Calcium may raise cancer risk. Research shows that higher intakes of both calcium and dairy products may increase a man's risk of prostate cancer by 30 to 50 percent.(iii) Plus, dairy consumption increases the body's level of insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) -- a known cancer promoter.
5. Calcium has benefits that dairy doesn't. Calcium supplements, but not dairy products, may reduce the risk of colon cancer.(iv)
6. Not everyone can stomach dairy.(v) About 75 percent of the world's population is genetically unable to properly digest milk and other dairy products -- a problem called lactose intolerance.
Based on such findings, Dr. Willet has come to some important conclusions:
• Everybody needs calcium -- but probably not as much as our government's recommended daily allowance (RDA) and calcium from diet, including greens and beans is better utilized by the body with less risk than calcium supplements.
• Calcium probably doesn't prevent broken bones. Few people in this country are likely to reduce their fracture risk by getting more calcium.
• Men may not want to take calcium supplements. Supplements of calcium and vitamin D may be reasonable for women.
• Dairy may be unhealthy. Advocating dairy consumption may have negative effects on health.
If all that isn't enough to swear you off milk, there are a few other scientific findings worth noting. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) recently asked the UDSA to look into the scientific basis of the claims made in the "milk mustache" ads. Their panel of scientists stated the truth clearly:
• Milk doesn't benefit sports performance.
• There's no evidence that dairy is good for your bones or prevents osteoporosis -- in fact, the animal protein it contains may help cause bone loss!
• Dairy is linked to prostate cancer.
• It's full of saturated fat and is linked to heart disease.
• Dairy causes digestive problems for the 75 percent of people with lactose intolerance.
• Dairy aggravates irritable bowel syndrome.
Simply put, the FTC asked the dairy industry, "Got Proof?" -- and the answer was NO!
Plus, dairy may contribute to even more health problems, like:
• Allergies (vi)
• Sinus problems
• Ear infections
• Type 1 diabetes (vii)
• Chronic constipation (viii)
• Anemia (in children)
Due to these concerns, many have begun to consider raw milk an alternative. But that isn't really a healthy form of dairy either ...
Yes, raw, whole, organic milk eliminates concerns like pesticides, hormones, antibiotics, and the effects of homogenization and pasteurization -- but to me, these benefits don't outweigh dairy's potential risks.
From an evolutionary point of view, milk is a strange food for humans. Until 10,000 years ago we didn't domesticate animals and weren't able to drink milk (unless some brave hunter-gather milked a wild tiger or buffalo!).
If you don't believe that, consider this: The majority of humans naturally stop producing significant amounts of lactase - the enzyme needed to properly metabolize lactose, the sugar in milk -- sometime between the ages of two and five. In fact, for most mammals, the normal condition is to stop producing the enzymes needed to properly digest and metabolize milk after they have been weaned.
Our bodies just weren't made to digest milk on a regular basis. Instead, most scientists agree that it's better for us to get calcium, potassium, protein, and fats from other food sources, like whole plant foods -- vegetables, fruits, beans, whole grains, nuts, seeds, and seaweed.
So here is my advice for dealing with dairy.
6 Tips for Dealing with Dairy
• Take your Cow for a Walk. It will do you much more good than drinking milk.
• Don't rely on dairy for healthy bones. If you want healthy bones, get plenty of exercise and supplement with 2,000 IU of vitamin D daily.
• Get your calcium from food. These include dark green leafy vegetables, sesame tahini, sea vegetables, and sardines or salmon with the bones.
• Try giving up all dairy. That means eliminate milk, cheese, yogurt, and ice cream for two weeks and see if you feel better. You should notice improvements with your sinuses, post-nasal drip, headaches, irritable bowel syndrome, energy, and weight. Then start eating dairy again and see how you feel. If you feel worse, you should try to give it up for life.
• If you can tolerate dairy, use only raw, organic dairy products. I suggest focusing on fermented products like unsweetened yogurt and kefir, occasionally.
• If you have to feed your child formula from milk, don't worry. The milk in infant formula is hydrolyzed or broken down and easier to digest (although it can still cause allergies). Once your child is a year old, switch him or her to real food and almond milk.
Still got milk? I hope not! Remember, dairy is not crucial for good health. I encourage you to go dairy-free and see what it does for you.
Now I'd like to hear from you ...
Do you agree or disagree that dairy is bad for you?
Have you experienced any problems consuming dairy?
What changes -- for better or worse -- have you experienced if you've tried eliminating dairy?
Please let me know your thoughts by leaving a comment below...
To your good health,
Mark Hyman, MD
References
(i) Feskanich D, Willett WC, Stampfer MJ, Colditz GA. Milk, dietary calcium, and bone fractures in women: a 12-year prospective study. Am J Public Health. 1997 Jun;87(6):992-7.
(ii) Feskanich D, Willett WC, Colditz GA. Calcium, vitamin D, milk consumption, and hip fractures: a prospective study among postmenopausal women. Am J Clin Nutr. 2003 Feb;77(2):504-11.
(iii) Tseng M, Breslow RA, Graubard BI, Ziegler RG. Dairy, calcium, and vitamin D intakes and prostate cancer risk in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Epidemiologic Follow-up Study cohort. Am J Clin Nutr. 2005 May;81(5):1147-54.
(iv) Huncharek M, Muscat J, Kupelnick B. Colorectal cancer risk and dietary intake of calcium, vitamin D, and dairy products: a meta-analysis of 26,335 cases from 60 observational studies. Nutr Cancer. 2009;61(1):47-69.
(v) Brannon PM, Carpenter TO, Fernandez JR, Gilsanz V, Gould JB, Hall KE, Hui SL, Lupton JR, Mennella J, Miller NJ, Osganian SK, Sellmeyer DE, Suchy FJ, Wolf MA. NIH Consensus Development Conference Statement: Lactose Intolerance and Health. NIH Consens State Sci Statements. 2010 Feb 24;27(2).
(vi) Bartley J, McGlashan SR. Does milk increase mucus production? Med Hypotheses. 2010 Apr;74(4):732-4.
(vii) Luopajärvi K, Savilahti E, Virtanen SM, Ilonen J, Knip M, Akerblom HK, Vaarala O. Enhanced levels of cow's milk antibodies in infancy in children who develop type 1 diabetes later in childhood. Pediatr Diabetes. 2008 Oct;9(5):434-41.
(viii) El-Hodhod MA, Younis NT, Zaitoun YA, Daoud SD. Cow's milk allergy related pediatric constipation: Appropriate time of milk tolerance. Pediatr Allergy Immunol. 2009 Jun 25.
Mark Hyman, M.D. practicing physician and founder of The UltraWellness Center is a pioneer in functional medicine. Dr. Hyman is now sharing the 7 ways to tap into your body's natural ability to heal itself. You can follow him on Twitter, connect with him on LinkedIn, watch his videos on Youtube and become a fan on Facebook.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-mark-hyman/dairy-free-dairy-6-reason_b_558876.html
These days, it seems like almost everybody does. Celebrities, athletes, and even former president Clinton's head of Health and Human Services, Donna Shalala, are all proud to wear the white "milk mustache." After all, everyone knows that you need milk to be healthy ...
Dairy is nature's perfect food -- but only if you're a calf.
If that sounds shocking to you, it's because very few people are willing to tell the truth about dairy. In fact, criticizing milk in America is like taking on motherhood, apple pie, or baseball. But that's just what I'm about to do.
Based on the research and my experience practicing medicine, I typically advise most of my patients to avoid dairy products completely. I like ice cream just as much as the next person, but as a scientist I have to look honestly at what we know. In today's blog I will explore many of the documented ill-effects of dairy, and give you six reasons you should avoid dairy at all costs.
The Reason I Have Problems with the USDA Food Pyramid
I'm aware that my advice to avoid dairy flies in the face of the new, "up-to-date" food pyramid from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). The USDA's pyramid recommends drinking 3 glasses of milk a day. What's wrong with that? Well, for one thing, it's not a recommendation that's based on strict science.
Some of the "experts" who helped create the pyramid actually work for the dairy industry, which makes the US Department of agriculture's recommendations reflect industry interests, not science or our best interests.
In fact, Walter Willett, M.D., Ph.D -- the second-most-cited scientist in all of clinical medicine and the head of nutrition at Harvard's School of Public Health -- is one of the pyramid's most vocal critics. He's even called its guidelines "udderly ridiculous." That's not something a Harvard scientist says lightly.
But Dr. Willett is right. The pyramid just isn't based on key scientific findings about health. In a moment we will take a look at some of the pyramid's recommendations and why I disagree with them.
But before I dissect why the current food pyramid is harmful to your health, I want to offer a bit of hope. I recently attended a medical conference put on by Harvard Medical School and the Culinary Institute of America called Healthy Kitchens, Healthy Lives and met Eric Rimm, who works closely with Walter Willett at Harvard School of Public Health and is a member of the 2010 USDA Dietary Guidelines for Americans Committee.
I asked him if he felt that science not industry would be shaping the new guidelines and he said there was only now one industry scientist on the new panel and he was objective and agreeable to make changes when presented the data. I am anxious to see how the science matches policy but feel a ray of hope that for the first time in the history of our dietary guidelines we will see science predominate, not industry interests and that the language will be direct, clear and simple to understand for all Americans. The guidelines from the early 1990's promoting the consumption of 6-11 servings of bread and cereals daily led to the pasta, carb, sugar generation and led to the largest epidemic of obesity in the history of our species.
Let's hope the new guidelines for 2010 will guide us toward greater health, not an increasing burden of obesity, diabetes and chronic disease. The USDA food policy guidelines form the basis of the school lunch program and it has contributed to a tripling of obesity in children. Let's hope we can serve up a different lunch menu for our children and our nation.
The simple idea that science should become policy is unfortunately one that has found little traction in Washington. But that seems to be shifting a little now.
Now back to why the last government guidelines from 2005 are harmful to your health!
1. Consume a variety of foods within and among the basic food groups while staying within your body's energy needs.
Sounds sensible -- but which food groups? If you choose dairy, meat, fats, and carbohydrates, the "perfect" meal could be a cheeseburger, milkshake, and fries with ketchup (potatoes and tomatoes are the two top vegetables consumed in America). Generic advice like that is pretty meaningless and potentially harmful.
2. Control your caloric intake to manage body weight.
Again, that sounds good, but as I wrote in my book UltraMetabolism, even the best-trained nutritionists and dietitians can't come close to correctly estimating their own caloric intake in a day. Also consider this: Is it okay to consume all of your calories from cola or ice cream as long as you stay within my caloric needs? Of course not. So this is more useless advice.
3. Increase intake of fruits and vegetables, whole grains, and nonfat or low-fat milk products.
Well, fruits, veggies, and whole grains are great. Milk -- not so much. I'll get back to that in a minute.
4. Choose carbohydrates wisely.
Who could argue with that? But how do they define "wisely"? The real advice here should be to cut down sugar intake from 185 pounds per person per year (what we currently consume) to less than a pound, avoid flour products (except as a treat), and stick to whole-food carbohydrates like vegetables, fruit, whole grains, beans, nuts, and seeds.
5. Choose to prepare food with little salt.
That's not bad advice. But it doesn't make sense if most of what you eat is packaged or processed foods that you don't actually prepare. For most Americans who eat half of their meals outside their homes, this isn't helpful. A better recommendation would be to avoid packaged, processed, canned, prepared, and fast foods (unless you know exactly how they are made).
6. If you drink alcoholic beverages, do so in moderation.
Sounds good -- but if you're usually drinking two bottles of wine a night, then one seems like moderation! I think a better suggestion is to limit your alcohol consumption to half a drink a day or 3 glasses a week (the amount that seems to have the most health benefit).
7. Don't eat unsafe foods.
Of course you shouldn't leave your egg salad out in the hot sun or toss your salad with hands that just handled raw chicken coated with salmonella. But the food pyramid guidelines don't mention pesticides, hormones, antibiotics, or genetically modified foods, despite scientific evidence of their harm. Shame on the USDA!
You can see now why I have big problems with the food pyramid! Its guidelines try to sound sensible -- while still protecting the interests of the food industry, the agriculture industry, and all of the lobbyists paying for the elections of the Congress. That way everybody's happy ...
But I'm not, and you shouldn't be either. The public just isn't served by this watered down, confusing, and useless pyramid. The next guidelines, I hope will be better, especially with independent scientists like Eric Rimm involved. Worse, some of the recommendations are downright harmful --like the one to drink more milk and dairy products.
The Truth about Dairy
According to Dr. Willett, who has done many studies and reviewed the research on this topic, there are many reasons to pass up milk, including:
1. Milk doesn't reduce fractures.(i) Contrary to popular belief, eating dairy products has never been shown to reduce fracture risk. In fact, according to the Nurses' Health Study dairy may increase risk of fractures by 50 percent!
2. Less dairy, better bones. Countries with lowest rates of dairy and calcium consumption (like those in Africa and Asia) have the lowest rates of osteoporosis.
3. Calcium isn't as bone-protective as we thought.(ii) Studies of calcium supplementation have shown no benefit in reducing fracture risk. Vitamin D appears to be much more important than calcium in preventing fractures.
4. Calcium may raise cancer risk. Research shows that higher intakes of both calcium and dairy products may increase a man's risk of prostate cancer by 30 to 50 percent.(iii) Plus, dairy consumption increases the body's level of insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) -- a known cancer promoter.
5. Calcium has benefits that dairy doesn't. Calcium supplements, but not dairy products, may reduce the risk of colon cancer.(iv)
6. Not everyone can stomach dairy.(v) About 75 percent of the world's population is genetically unable to properly digest milk and other dairy products -- a problem called lactose intolerance.
Based on such findings, Dr. Willet has come to some important conclusions:
• Everybody needs calcium -- but probably not as much as our government's recommended daily allowance (RDA) and calcium from diet, including greens and beans is better utilized by the body with less risk than calcium supplements.
• Calcium probably doesn't prevent broken bones. Few people in this country are likely to reduce their fracture risk by getting more calcium.
• Men may not want to take calcium supplements. Supplements of calcium and vitamin D may be reasonable for women.
• Dairy may be unhealthy. Advocating dairy consumption may have negative effects on health.
If all that isn't enough to swear you off milk, there are a few other scientific findings worth noting. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) recently asked the UDSA to look into the scientific basis of the claims made in the "milk mustache" ads. Their panel of scientists stated the truth clearly:
• Milk doesn't benefit sports performance.
• There's no evidence that dairy is good for your bones or prevents osteoporosis -- in fact, the animal protein it contains may help cause bone loss!
• Dairy is linked to prostate cancer.
• It's full of saturated fat and is linked to heart disease.
• Dairy causes digestive problems for the 75 percent of people with lactose intolerance.
• Dairy aggravates irritable bowel syndrome.
Simply put, the FTC asked the dairy industry, "Got Proof?" -- and the answer was NO!
Plus, dairy may contribute to even more health problems, like:
• Allergies (vi)
• Sinus problems
• Ear infections
• Type 1 diabetes (vii)
• Chronic constipation (viii)
• Anemia (in children)
Due to these concerns, many have begun to consider raw milk an alternative. But that isn't really a healthy form of dairy either ...
Yes, raw, whole, organic milk eliminates concerns like pesticides, hormones, antibiotics, and the effects of homogenization and pasteurization -- but to me, these benefits don't outweigh dairy's potential risks.
From an evolutionary point of view, milk is a strange food for humans. Until 10,000 years ago we didn't domesticate animals and weren't able to drink milk (unless some brave hunter-gather milked a wild tiger or buffalo!).
If you don't believe that, consider this: The majority of humans naturally stop producing significant amounts of lactase - the enzyme needed to properly metabolize lactose, the sugar in milk -- sometime between the ages of two and five. In fact, for most mammals, the normal condition is to stop producing the enzymes needed to properly digest and metabolize milk after they have been weaned.
Our bodies just weren't made to digest milk on a regular basis. Instead, most scientists agree that it's better for us to get calcium, potassium, protein, and fats from other food sources, like whole plant foods -- vegetables, fruits, beans, whole grains, nuts, seeds, and seaweed.
So here is my advice for dealing with dairy.
6 Tips for Dealing with Dairy
• Take your Cow for a Walk. It will do you much more good than drinking milk.
• Don't rely on dairy for healthy bones. If you want healthy bones, get plenty of exercise and supplement with 2,000 IU of vitamin D daily.
• Get your calcium from food. These include dark green leafy vegetables, sesame tahini, sea vegetables, and sardines or salmon with the bones.
• Try giving up all dairy. That means eliminate milk, cheese, yogurt, and ice cream for two weeks and see if you feel better. You should notice improvements with your sinuses, post-nasal drip, headaches, irritable bowel syndrome, energy, and weight. Then start eating dairy again and see how you feel. If you feel worse, you should try to give it up for life.
• If you can tolerate dairy, use only raw, organic dairy products. I suggest focusing on fermented products like unsweetened yogurt and kefir, occasionally.
• If you have to feed your child formula from milk, don't worry. The milk in infant formula is hydrolyzed or broken down and easier to digest (although it can still cause allergies). Once your child is a year old, switch him or her to real food and almond milk.
Still got milk? I hope not! Remember, dairy is not crucial for good health. I encourage you to go dairy-free and see what it does for you.
Now I'd like to hear from you ...
Do you agree or disagree that dairy is bad for you?
Have you experienced any problems consuming dairy?
What changes -- for better or worse -- have you experienced if you've tried eliminating dairy?
Please let me know your thoughts by leaving a comment below...
To your good health,
Mark Hyman, MD
References
(i) Feskanich D, Willett WC, Stampfer MJ, Colditz GA. Milk, dietary calcium, and bone fractures in women: a 12-year prospective study. Am J Public Health. 1997 Jun;87(6):992-7.
(ii) Feskanich D, Willett WC, Colditz GA. Calcium, vitamin D, milk consumption, and hip fractures: a prospective study among postmenopausal women. Am J Clin Nutr. 2003 Feb;77(2):504-11.
(iii) Tseng M, Breslow RA, Graubard BI, Ziegler RG. Dairy, calcium, and vitamin D intakes and prostate cancer risk in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Epidemiologic Follow-up Study cohort. Am J Clin Nutr. 2005 May;81(5):1147-54.
(iv) Huncharek M, Muscat J, Kupelnick B. Colorectal cancer risk and dietary intake of calcium, vitamin D, and dairy products: a meta-analysis of 26,335 cases from 60 observational studies. Nutr Cancer. 2009;61(1):47-69.
(v) Brannon PM, Carpenter TO, Fernandez JR, Gilsanz V, Gould JB, Hall KE, Hui SL, Lupton JR, Mennella J, Miller NJ, Osganian SK, Sellmeyer DE, Suchy FJ, Wolf MA. NIH Consensus Development Conference Statement: Lactose Intolerance and Health. NIH Consens State Sci Statements. 2010 Feb 24;27(2).
(vi) Bartley J, McGlashan SR. Does milk increase mucus production? Med Hypotheses. 2010 Apr;74(4):732-4.
(vii) Luopajärvi K, Savilahti E, Virtanen SM, Ilonen J, Knip M, Akerblom HK, Vaarala O. Enhanced levels of cow's milk antibodies in infancy in children who develop type 1 diabetes later in childhood. Pediatr Diabetes. 2008 Oct;9(5):434-41.
(viii) El-Hodhod MA, Younis NT, Zaitoun YA, Daoud SD. Cow's milk allergy related pediatric constipation: Appropriate time of milk tolerance. Pediatr Allergy Immunol. 2009 Jun 25.
Mark Hyman, M.D. practicing physician and founder of The UltraWellness Center is a pioneer in functional medicine. Dr. Hyman is now sharing the 7 ways to tap into your body's natural ability to heal itself. You can follow him on Twitter, connect with him on LinkedIn, watch his videos on Youtube and become a fan on Facebook.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-mark-hyman/dairy-free-dairy-6-reason_b_558876.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)