I saw an ad in a prominent health magazine the other day that ticked me off. It’s an ad for Prilosec, an over-the-counter proton pump inhibitor (PPI). The ad said, “Suffering from heartburn day after day is as unnecessary as wearing sleeves.” (Larry the Cable Guy was in the ad—he never wears sleeves; thus, the reference.)

 The ad went on to say, “Don’t be one of them folks (again, Larry the Cable Guy influenced) who gets heartburn and then treats, day after day. Block the acid by treating your frequent heartburn with Prilosec OTC and don’t get heartburn in the first place.”

 This ad talks about how you shouldn’t take other heartburn products every day after you get heartburn, but instead you should take Prilosec before you even get heartburn. They don’t directly tell you to take Prilosec every day, but it is certainly implied in the ad. The crazy thing is, Prilosec should not be taken for more than two weeks in a row, and not more often than every four months. There is even a little disclaimer right on the ad (required by the FDA):

 “Use as directed for 14 days to treat frequent heartburn. Do not take for more than 14 days or more often than every 4 months unless directed by a doctor.” It also says, “Not for immediate relief.”

I find this ad very misleading. People are taking PPIs—over-the-counter and prescription—way too often, and for way too long. No one is reading the fine print. 

This week, if you are taking proton pump inhibitors, talk to your doctor about the risks, and about what you can do reduce the symptoms in the first place—without resorting to these dangerous medications.

Share this Post...

Health, Heartburn, PPI, prescription, proton pump inhibitor, risks, symptoms

 Well, well, well. I always find it funny how long it takes research to catch up with the rest of us. Don’t get me wrong, I love that research is now validating many things we in the natural health field have been saying for decades, but I also find it humorous. At least they’ll start listening to us now.

A recent study published in the journal Nutritional Neuroscience reports the effectiveness of a gluten-free, dairy-free diet for children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Many children on the autism spectrum have digestive symptoms. I talk about addressing digestive symptoms as an important aspect of treating autism in my book The Road To Perfect Health. (Actually, I talk about addressing digestive symptoms as an important aspect of treating most, if not all, health conditions.)

In the study, those children with digestive and allergy symptoms found the most improvement in symptoms when on a gluten-free, dairy-free diet. Parents reported improved digestive symptoms, and increased social behaviors such as language production, eye contact, engagement, attention span, requesting behavior, and social responsiveness. Although some parents reported eliminating one or the other—gluten or dairy—those children who eliminated both for at least six months showed the greatest improvement. 

This supports something I try to convey myself—the gluten-free, dairy-free diet may need to be followed for a number of months before you see major differences, especially in conditions that are not “in the gut.” For ASD specifically, there are many reports of children improving on this diet.

Although the diet can be difficult at first, and it requires a lot of planning and cooking at home, just think about the possible benefits. Find a doctor through the Autism Research Institute, who will be familiar with looking at more than behavioral therapies for children and adults with ASD. Autism spectrum disorder is a complex, multifactorial condition, and gut health plays an important role.

Share this Post...

allergy, ASD, autism spectrum disorder, Children, dairy-free, diet, digestive symptoms, gluten-free, gluten-free dairy-free diet, gut, Health, natural health, research, symptoms

According to a recent study published in the journal Chronic Illness, women with celiac disease are more likely to report stress, depression and disordered eating, even if they are following a gluten-free diet.

The researchers found that women adhering to a gluten-free diet did experience greater vitality, lower stress, decreased depressive symptoms, and greater overall emotional health than those women not following the diet, but even so, they still experienced more stress, depression, and body dissatisfaction when compared to the general population.

I can see how people with celiac disease not following a gluten-free diet could have these issues. Gluten is a digestive tract’s nightmare in people with celiac disease (and most people, really), which would be enough to depress anyone. But I can also see how people adhering to the diet can struggle with stress, depression, and body image issues.

Eating gluten-free, even in today’s world of readily available gluten-free fare, is a big adjustment, even when you have been eating gluten-free for years. Food becomes a central focus, rather than an afterthought. Everyday meal planning is required to be sure you have access to the right foods. Shopping at multiple grocery stores becomes the norm. Eating gluten-free creates a whole new way of life. This has the possibility of becoming stressful—and even alienating, depending on the company you keep.

But eating gluten-free—especially in those with celiac, but even in those who are gluten sensitive—is also a ticket to freedom for many people. Freedom from constant digestive issues with seemingly no solution, freedom from wondering, “What the heck is wrong with me?” and freedom from a downward health spiral that itself can cause more stress, dis-ease, and depression.

If you have celiac and you tend to get down about it, take a moment to think about what a gluten-free diet has given you, rather than what it has taken away. Sometimes a shift in perspective is all you need.

Share this Post...

body image, celiac disease, chronic, depression, diet, digestive issues, digestive tract, disease, eating, eating gluten-free, food, gluten, Gluten-free diet, Health, stress, symptoms, women

Renew You Challenge

Let’s start this week off right!

Here is your newest weekly challenge (I mean opportunity!) to help set you off on the right foot and in the right direction for bringing health to your week. You could even add it to your calendar. Join us! 

Air pollution is the collective term for the contamination of air by an array of chemicals and particles. Air pollution is associated with many health conditions, including lung disease, heart disease, and cancer. To monitor levels of air pollution, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) developed the Air Quality Index, a daily assessment of air quality in over 1,000 locations nationwide.

You may have heard the Air Quality Index reported when checking the weather on television, in the newspaper, or on the internet. If not, you can access it here anytime. People with certain conditions, especially lung disease, need to pay especially close attention to the AQI, according to the EPA. I think everyone should pay attention to it.

Car exhaust is a major contributor to local air pollution levels, so if you can avoid walking next to busy roads during rush hour, please do. And if you drive in rush hour traffic, consider a HEPA filter for your car. This week, check your local Air Quality Index, and think about when you are most exposed to air pollution. If you can make any changes to lessen the exposure, it’s worth it.

For more information on the report, click here.

Share this Post...

air pollution, Air Quality Index, AQI, cancer, chemicals, Conditions, contamination, EPA, exposure, Health, heart disease, HEPA filter, lung disease

Renew You Challenge

Let’s start this week off right!

Weekly challenge (I mean opportunity!) to help set you off on the right foot and in the right direction for bringing health to your week. You could even add it to your calendar.  Join us! 

A recent study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) has found that women who consume rice have higher levels of arsenic detected in urine than those women who do not eat rice. Arsenic is a heavy metal that naturally occurs in the environment, but at higher levels can be detrimental to human health.

The World Health Organization (WHO) has set limits for arsenic in groundwater at 10 mg/L. The rice plant has the ability to extract arsenic and store it in the rice grain. Currently, there are no regulations for arsenic levels in rice, so this presents a potential problem. This new study will hopefully lead to more studies that examine the potential health risks of arsenic exposure in rice. For now, no recommendations are made to avoid rice, as it is thought to be an important nutrient in the diets of many people.

Scientists do recommend having well water tested, as 10 percent of the women in the study were drinking well water that exceeded the current WHO limits for arsenic. The senior author of the paper stated, “Arsenic exposure during pregnancy is a public health concern due to potential health risks to the fetus.” Though they do not recommend pregnant women avoid rice at this time, I would say it’s probably not a good idea to eat rice every day. It’s too early to know much, but it might be prudent to cut back on rice if you are expecting.

This week, if you have well water, get it tested for arsenic to be sure you are well under the 10 mg/L limit.

Share this Post...

arsenic, Diets, environment, Health, health risks, heavy metal, pregnancy, rice, women

In pediatric medicine, antibiotics are among the most commonly prescribed medications, with more than 30 million prescriptions written each year. A recent study analyzed antibiotic prescribing patterns in outpatient visits in the United States between 2006 and 2008. Antibiotics were prescribed in 21 percent of visits. Respiratory conditions accounted for most of the prescriptions (72 percent).

Prescriptions for broad-spectrum antibiotics, those that target a broad range of bacteria, were prescribed in 63 percent of those cases, but they were prescribed for infections for which antibiotics were not indicated. That means they were inappropriately prescribed for conditions for which antibiotics don’t work, conditions like bronchitis, viral pneumonia, and influenza.

Though overall rates for antibiotic prescriptions in outpatient pediatric care have declined, it is obvious from this report that antibiotics are still being overprescribed. Certainly, antibiotics play an important role in helping to stop harmful, and even deadly, infections, but when they are prescribed for conditions for which they are not helpful, they only serve to increase antibiotic resistance, a considerable health threat to modern medicine.

Not to mention, inappropriate overuse of antibiotics can contribute to gut imbalance that can have health effects that extend throughout a lifetime. Remember that digestive health is the foundation upon which total-body health is built.

Share this Post...

antibiotic resistance, antibiotics, broad-spectrum antibiotics, bronchitis, childhood, Digestive Health, gut imbalance, Health, infections, influenza, medications, medicine, overprescribed, pediatric, pneumonia, prescriptions, total-body health

Every year, the United Health Foundation publishes its state health rankings, a report of data collected on 23 measures of health compiled by different federal agencies. The rankings take into account behavioral, socioeconomic, and other factors that predict good health of a state, like rates of binge drinking, smoking and obesity, and factors like air pollution, violent crime, childhood poverty, and low rates of health insurance.

Between 1990 and 2000, health measures improved, but over the last decade that improvement slowed. In 2011 there was no improvement. The poor economy has been blamed, a factor that may influence poor health habits. Overall the report finds that 27.5 percent of the population is obese, 17.3 percent smoke cigarettes, and 8.7 percent have diabetes, all preventable contributors to poor health.

The five most unhealthy states:

50. Mississippi

49. Louisiana

48. Oklahoma

47. Arkansas

46. Alabama

The five healthiest states:

1. Vermont

2. New Hampshire

3. Connecticut

4. Hawaii

5. Massachusetts

For the full report, click here.

Share this Post...

diabetes, Health, measures, obese, rankings, smoke, states, United Health Foundation

During pregnancy, mothers-to-be generally try to eat better and take better care of themselves in the hopes of improving the health of their infants. Pregnant moms may also try avoiding certain chemical exposures like cigarette smoke and even harsh cleaning products. This can be a tricky task, however. One recent study has found that flame retardant exposure—a difficult exposure to avoid—is linked to lower birth weight in babies.

The study, published in the American Journal of Epidemiology, found that for every tenfold increase in PBDE (polybrominated diphenyl ether) levels in the mother’s blood, there was a 4.1 ounce drop in the baby’s birth weight. Lead researcher Kim Harley, from the University of California, Berkley’s School of Public Health, stated, “What we saw was a shift toward lighter babies among women with higher PBDE exposure rather than a dramatic increase in the number of low birth weight babies.” For babies already at risk for low birth weight for other reasons, 4.1 ounces would make a big difference.

The PBDEs tested for in the study were actually phased out of use in 2004, but because they are found in many household items, their persistence is still widespread. These chemicals leach from furniture, upholstery, carpet, electronics and more (even baby products and children’s pajamas!), and are stored in fat cells. Flame retardants have been linked to reduced fertility and thyroid dysfunction in women.

How do we get out of this toxic soup? Well, we can’t. But the researchers do recommend wet mopping when dusting since flame retardants are concentrated in dust, and frequent hand washing to avoid ingesting these chemicals.

Share this Post...

babies, chemicals, dust, exposure, fire retardant, Health, infants, low birth weight, mothers, PBDE, polybrominated diphenyl ether, pregnancy, pregnant, toxic

The Environmental Working Group (EWG) has done it again. EWG is a public health non-profit organization on a mission to use the power of public information to protect public health and the environment. That’s a tall order for any organization, and EWG is doing a fine job.

Their latest project involves the assessment of 84 breakfast cereals marketed to children. What they found was that some cereals had more sugar than a Twinkie, which contains 18 g of sugar. More than half of all cereals assessed contained more sugar than three Chips Ahoy! cookies, which contain 11 g of sugar. The report summed it up well: “Most parents say no to dessert for breakfast, but many children’s cereals have just as much sugar as a dessert—or more.”

Here is a list of the 10 worst children’s cereals:

Kelloggs, Honey Smacks

Post Golden Crisp

Kellogg’s Froot Loops Marshmallow

Quaker Oats Cap’n Crunch’s OOPS! All Berries

Quaker Oats Cap’n Crunch Original

Quaker Oats Oh!s

Kellogg Smorz

Kellogg’s Smorz

Quaker Oats Cap’n Crunch’s Crunch Berries

Kellogg’s Froot Loops Original

So this week, it’s time to assess your breakfast pantry. If you happen to eat these cereals, or feed them to your children—STOP! But don’t stop there. Check the sugar content—and the carbohydrate and fiber content for that matter—on your breakfast foods. The problem with most breakfast cereals is that they are high in carbohydrates and low in protein and fiber. Protein helps give you brain power that lasts throughout the day, and fiber helps reduce the absorption of sugar in the body. Try eggs for breakfast instead of cereal, or a protein shake.

Share this Post...

breakfast, breakfast cereals, carbohydrate, cereals, Children, eggs, environment, environmental working group, EWG, fiber, Health, protein, sugar, sugar content, Twinkie

The human gut is home to thousands of different bacterial species, totaling 100 trillion bacterial cells—that’s about four pounds of bacteria, or the weight of a brick. The composition of this bacterial population (also known as the gut microbiota), is currently being studied. Dr. Smith recently blogged on it.

A new study by researchers from the University of Pennsylvania, published in Science, takes the findings further. This new study found two major gut types—Bacteroides and Prevotella—based on gut bacterial population groups in 98 healthy volunteers who were asked to fill out questionnaires that assessed dietary habits. Stool samples were collected to determine their gut microbiota composition.

The researchers found a link between dietary habits and gut types. People who ate a diet high in meat and saturated fat were higher in Bacteroides bacteria, and people who had a diet high in carbohydrates had more Prevotella bacteria. Researchers then took ten volunteers and fed half of them a diet high in fat and low in fiber, and fed the other half a low-fat, high-fiber diet. By the end of ten days the bacterial populations had begun to change, but were still predominantly the same Bacteroides and Prevotella groups. This indicates that it’s possible to change the gut microbiota with diet, but it will take more than a short term change to see any major difference.

Next steps will be to replicate these findings to confirm them, and to take the studies further by looking at whether these gut types are associated with health or disease. It’s an exciting area of research, working out the details of what I have said all along—your gut is the foundation of the health of the rest of your body. It all begins in the gut.

Share this Post...

bacteria, Bacteroides, body, carbohydrates, diet, dietary habits, disease, fat, fiber, gut microbiota, gut types, Health, high-fiber, human gut, meat, Prevotella, saturated fat