Weight Loss & Obesity | Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health

By Dr. Ron Hoffman: Can you really “lose 40 pounds in 40 days”?

Fri, 23 Mar 2018 19:04:27 +0000

If you listen to AM radio, it’s likely you’re continually assailed with ads that claim that you can lose “25-40 pounds in 40 days.” There’s not even a qualifier that this is a best-case scenario like “Results may vary” or the disclaimer “Weight loss may not be typical” (which I thought the Federal Trade Commission used to insist accompany these kinds of pitches).
These incredible successes are said to be achievable with “No shots, no hormones, no surgery.” The advertisers aver that they’re “contractually obligated” to refund your money if you don’t lose all that weight.
What’s the secret sauce, I wonder? The promoters don’t disclose it, but they claim their methods “burn toxic fat” and somehow eliminate your unique personal roadblocks to metabolic efficiency.
They say they use “DNA testing” and some way of pinpointing which of your organs are malfunctioning to individualize your program.
One claim is that a saliva sample of DNA will help match you to your optimal diet. That’s the basis for the emerging science of “nutrigenomics,” but a recent study showed that genetic analysis provided no useful prediction about whether subjects would do better on a low-carb vs. a low-fat diet. Someday the technique may be refined, but I’ve thoroughly field-tested DNA analysis and I’ve concluded that, in its present form, it offers scant useful insights on what or how my patients should be eating.
I’ll confess I have NO idea what the diet centers’ “black box” approach entails. They don’t precisely disclose it. But I do know from talking to patients who’ve participated that it involves a very low calorie diet—as low as 500-600 calories per day.
They say their program is “medically supervised,” but I could find no evidence that they have any health professionals other than a chiropractor on staff. Maybe I’m missing something?
What are the risks of such rapid weight loss?

Gallstones, which occur in 12-15% of patients who lose large amounts of weight rapidly
Headaches
Irritability and depression
Fatigue
Constipation
Hair loss
Muscle wasting
Dizziness
Menstrual irregularities
Nutritional deficiencies
Heart problems

The latter are particularly disquieting. A recent study revealed that while body fat stores are depleted, paradoxical fat accumulation affects the heart during very low calorie dieting. This was associated with a deterioration in heart function, including the heart’s ability to pump blood. This, along with electrolyte imbalances, might be particularly dangerous for individuals who, by virtue of their obesity, may already be highly predisposed to heart problems.
The good news is that if you survive an eight-week adjustment period, heart function improves, and the circulatory system benefits from reduced weight, lowered lipids, and enhanced insulin sensitivity.
With rapid weight loss, it’s almost impossible to completely spare muscle mass; claims to the contrary that one or the other weight loss scheme uniquely preserves muscle while exclusively burning fat are illusory. Only slow, gradual weight loss supported with resistance training can make it less likely that the dieter will cannibalize their own muscle tissue.
The example of the “Biggest Losers” is instructive. A study was done of contestants after their remarkable diet successes on the program, some achieving 3-digit weight losses with draconian caloric restriction and punishing exercise regimens. All but one or two had regained all the weight that they had lost—and then some. Why was it so difficult for them to maintain their target weight?
National Institutes of Health researchers decided to intensively study these contestants. In a now-famous paper entitled “Persistent metabolic adaptation 6 years after ‘The Biggest Loser’ competition,” scientists discovered that participants had undergone extreme “metabolic adaptation”: their resting metabolic rates—the amount of calories they burned without exertion—had plummeted. This is part of the body’s perverse but evolutionarily-sound adaptation to starvation. When faced with extinction, the body goes into severe conservation mode.
After decades guiding people on weight optimization programs, I’ve concluded that there’s no short-cut around this law of nature. The only way to achieve permanent, sustainable weight loss is via slow gradual weight loss, around 2-4 pounds per month, over a period of 18-36 months.
It’s difficult to sustain because the results aren’t as dramatic, and motivation wanes when you’re looking for a quick fix for your weight woes. Like most things worth doing, it takes time and determination. Holding out the prospect of losing 25-40 pounds in 40 days just doubles down on the duplicity that perpetuates yo-yo dieting.
And we know that losing weight, then regaining it, is worse even than sustained overweight. Yo-yo dieting is associated with a myriad of health woes. It results in a net loss of muscle, which is easily replaced with fat, leading to a higher risk of fatty liver, diabetes and heart disease; worst of all, it discourages dieters from undertaking more permanent, constructive efforts at weight optimization.
There are plenty of better ways to lose weight. Among the more promising:

Whole30®️ Diet: I undertook the Whole30 paleo-style diet two and a half years ago as an experiment to improve my energy, focus and athletic performance. While not even intending to, I lost 8-10 pounds of body fat and now fit into size 32 jeans. The Whole30 eliminates all grains, carbs, legumes, sugar, poor quality oils, chips and alcohol. While I “cheat” now and then, it’s still easy to maintain my new weight.
Time Restricted Feeding (TRF): Rather than changing what you eat, you simply restrict food intake to a narrower time window. Most poor quality eating occurs at night, so putting aside the feedbag after 6 PM invariably helps you shed pounds.
Intermittent Fasting (IF): In the 5:2 plan, you eat normally for five days, then calorie restrict for two; Other schemes, like that of Dr. Valter Longo, incorporate a Fasting Mimicking Diet (FMD) for five days per month.
Ketogenic Diet: Drastically restricting carbs yields weight loss dividends, and can be helpful for neurological disorders as well as Type 2 diabetes.
Salad and Salmon Diet: A low-carb version of my own Salad and Salmon Diet, incorporating many features of the healthy Mediterranean Diet, has been a mainstay of my approach to weight loss over the years.

If you’re a veteran of the diet wars, I’d love to hear from you—share what’s worked and what hasn’t worked for you. Email me at radioprogram@aol.com and we’ll discuss on one of our podcasts!

The post By Dr. Ron Hoffman: Can you really “lose 40 pounds in 40 days”? first appeared on Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health.

By ICIM member Valeska Wells, DO: Sleep matters

Tue, 30 Jan 2018 13:52:03 +0000

Everyone knows that sleep is important, but did you know that it can impact your weight?
If you’re trying to drop a few pounds, maybe you should think about your pillow. While sleeping doesn’t take away the benefit of eating healthy and exercise, it does play a key role in the management of your body weight.
Several long term studies have been conducted to look at the impact of sleep on your weight. These studies found that inadequate sleep was associated with higher weight in children and adults. In adults, studies found that sleep and the intake of sugar and caffeine were inversely related (the less you sleep, the more likely you are to reach for those donuts and coffee). These studies also found that the less you sleep, the more likely you are to eat or snack at late night hours, and more likely to choose sweet or salty snacks. These late night snacks can impact your metabolism and predispose you to weight gain.
When looking at children and sleep habits (even when other factors including parental obesity, TV time, and physical activity are removed from the equation), children who don’t sleep enough are more likely to be obese. Some factors that can impact your infant’s sleep include the introduction of solids before 4 months of age and infant TV viewing. Childhood sleep habits may also have a long-term impact on adult weight. One study showed that each hour reduction in sleep resulted in a 50% higher risk of obesity by early 30s in adulthood. Early US trials are showing some positive impact on teaching new parents ways to develop good sleep and feeding habits in their newborn and the prevention of obesity during toddler years.
Sleep is so important regardless of the lifestage, with more and more reasearch showing it’s impact on your weight throughout your life.

So how does your sleep actually impact your body weight?

Sleep alters hunger hormones. The less sleep you get the higher those hunger hormones become and the lower your satiety hormones become. This can cause you to crave fatty and carbohydrate rich foods. It will also prevent you from being satisfied when you do eat enough.
You have more time to eat. The more time you have to eat, the more likely you are going to consume more calories during your awake hours.
You’re more likely to snack more. Less sleep is associated with more snacking.
You may make less healthy choices. Studies are showing that those who don’t get enough sleep are more likely to eat out and have irregular meal patterns (hello drive through?).
Decreased physical activity. How many of you feel like going to the gym when you are fighting to stay awake during the day? Studies are showing people who don’t have enough sleep are more likely to watch TV instead of doing physical activity. This will also allow you to pack on the pounds.
Lower body temperature. People who are sleep deprived tend to have a lower body temperature which results in a lower amount of calories your body needs.

Ideal sleep should be between seven to eight hours a night for adults. Recent research shows only about 26% of American adults are getting enough sleep at night. How is your sleep?

The post By ICIM member Valeska Wells, DO: Sleep matters first appeared on Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health.

Dietitian Organization Attempts to Cash In on Obesity

Tue, 25 Jun 2013 21:00:20 +0000

It’s politics as usual, but at a cost: the health of the American public. Action Alert!

The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (AND, formerly the American Dietetic Association) has collaborated on a Medicare bill that will ensure that Registered Dietitians receive Medicare reimbursement for weight loss counseling. This bill excludes most other nutrition professionals, including many nutritionists and health coaches, limiting consumers’ options.

HR 2415, the Treat and Reduce Obesity Act of 2013, would allow Registered Dietitians (that is, dietitians who go through the AND’s credentialing program), Certified Diabetes Educators, and instructors trained and certified by the National Diabetes Prevention Lifestyle Coach Training Program (funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) to perform intensive behavioral therapy, communicate nutrition plans to an individual’s primary care physician or practitioner, and be reimbursed for these services by Medicare. It would also provide Medicare coverage on new prescription drugs for obesity management (note that Medicare does not currently provide coverage for weight loss drugs—see our article on that subject in this issue).

The AND is primarily responsible for creating this legislation. An AND spokesperson said, “For nearly two years, the Academy has been working on developing legislation to expand coverage for registered dietitian nutritionists to provide intensive behavioral counseling for obesity outside of the primary care setting.” This, unfortunately, is a ruse: yes the bill expands coverage for RDs, but in whose best interest is this? Only the RDs. It’s certainly not in the best interest of consumers, who now will have even fewer options.

Registered Dietitians (RDs) are allowed to perform services and receive reimbursement on their own merits, while other nutrition professionals, even those with higher educational credentials and twice as many clinical hours to their credit, are excluded unless they have gone through one of the other two listed programs. In other words, the bill would create a distinction that does not currently exist in federal law (the Social Security Act, which controls Medicare, provides equal treatment for RDs and other qualified nutrition professionals).

Medical Nutrition Therapy (MNT) services for people with diabetes are covered under Medicare part B. Currently, federal rules state that RDs or qualified nutrition professionals may provide services so long as they meet certain education and experience requirements and have been certified by a national nutrition organization. If other qualified nutrition professionals can provide MNT services under Medicare, why in the world should they be edged out of reimbursement for obesity management services?

More importantly, it is difficult to believe that the AND is qualified to address our obesity crisis, considering their widely known conflicts of interest: AND receives funding from junk food companies like Coca-Cola, Hershey, Council, Mars, and PepsiCo—the very agents of the obesity epidemic. Furthermore, they conduct continuing education courses sponsored by Coke in which RDs are told that sugar, artificial colors, and nonnutritive sweeteners are perfectly fine for children, and concerns to the contrary are merely “urban myths”!

RDs are credentialed by the Commission on Dietetic Registration, a private organization. “Registered Dietitian” is not a government-based credential, so there is no reason it should be awarded preferential treatment over other credentialing organizations—particularly when it excludes those who possess Masters and PhDs in nutrition from accredited colleges and universities, as well as professionals qualified by other worthy nutrition credentialing organizations.

The bill’s introduction trails an announcement by the American Medical Association that they’ve decided to classify obesity as a disease (see our article in this issue)—and it’s clear that the AND is attempting to cash in on it. Whether you think obesity should be classified as a disease or not, we can all agree that it’s a worsening epidemic in the US. We should be increasing coverage and reimbursement for nutrition professionals who offer nutrition counseling for obesity, not restricting access! More than 104 million Americans are obese; obesity-related conditions include heart disease, strokes, type 2 diabetes, and certain types of cancer. Obesity and related conditions are the leading cause of preventable death. It’s expensive, too. In 2008, medical costs associated with obesity were $147 billion; annual medical costs for individuals were $1,429 higher for obese people than for people of normal weight.

Access to a variety of nutrition professionals is vital to consumers: it allows them to choose a practitioner who aligns with their natural health lifestyle and values. With obesity as widespread and as costly as it is, why should only one organization’s nutrition professionals be given the exclusive right to counsel patients on ways to treat it?

Action Alert! Please write your representative and ask him or her to amend the bill to expand Medicare reimbursement to all qualified nutrition professionals!

The post Dietitian Organization Attempts to Cash In on Obesity first appeared on Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health.

Gastric Bypass Surgery for Everyone!

Tue, 07 May 2013 21:19:51 +0000

New recommendations from doctors take us even further in the wrong direction. Action Alert.
Three medical societies—the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, the Obesity Society, and the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery—jointly announced last month that they were changing their guidance on who should get metabolic and bariatric surgery, and which methods should be used.
These new guidelines state that bariatric surgery should be expanded to include mildly to moderately obese people (class 1 obesity) who have diabetes or metabolic syndrome. Eligible patients would have a body mass index (BMI) of 30 or above; for a 5’9” adult, that’s a weight of 203 lbs. or higher—only 35 pounds over what is considered a healthy weight.
This recommendation comes with a disclaimer: “Current evidence is limited by the number of subjects studied and lack of long term data demonstrating net benefit.” It is further noted that there is currently insufficient evidence for recommending a bariatric surgical procedure specifically for glycemic control alone, fat reduction alone, or cardiovascular disease risk reduction alone, independent of BMI criteria.
In their press release, this statement is immediately followed up—with no irony whatsoever—with these words: “These clinical guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations and information to help surgeons, primary care doctors and other health professionals make the most informed decisions for the benefit of patients.” Evidence-based? How absurd! There’s no evidence at all for their recommendation, by their own admission!
This is not the first time conventional medicine has recommended reducing the threshold for bariatric surgery. In 2011 we told you about an FDA panel’s recommendation that lap-band surgery be made available to 12 million more people than before.
Gastric bypass surgery is not only a popular medical procedure; it is also an economic goldmine. Bariatric surgery has a 45% profit margin—larger than most procedures (by contrast, other money-making procedures like coronary artery bypass surgery have an estimated profit margin of only 30%). And it’s almost always covered by insurance.
Bariatric surgery can reduce weight—at least at first. But weight loss does not necessarily result from reducing stomach size or primarily from that. New research suggests that the weight loss that occurs after gastric bypass surgery may be the result of changes to stomach flora. This study is discussed in the May 2013 issue of Dr. David Williams’s Alternatives newsletter. It has been known for some time that after surgery, the gut changes in its chemistry, not just its size—but it wasn’t clear whether the chemical changes were produced by the weight reduction, or caused it. This study found that the chemical changes were the catalyst to weight loss.
The data isn’t conclusive for humans—the study used test animals—and much remains to be understood about the process involved. If chemical changes in the gut are what causes people to lose weight, not a change in stomach size, it is better by far to shift the gut bacteria using probiotics.
Bariatric surgery is far from routine. Studies show that 1% of patients die from the surgery, and complications affect up to 40% of patients, including vomiting, diarrhea, infections, hernias and respiratory failure; as well nutritional deficiency, potentially resulting in anemia, osteoporosis, and bizarre neurological problems. Seizures and paralysis have even been reported in extreme cases. One thing to worry about in particular is damage to the vagus nerve, which controls many important digestive functions including bile release and the movement of food.
Moreover, a study from the Journal of the American Medical Association shows that bariatric surgery does nothing to reduce a patient’s long-term health care expenses. On top of that, the surgery is considered a “success” if only 50% of one’s excess weight is lost—even though the patient would still be overweight or obese—and within ten years, as few as 20% of patients have maintained their weight loss. This may be because the chemical changes in the remaining gut do not persist—though they could be maintained with the right diet and supplements. Indeed, these ideal gut conditions could and should be created without the surgery in the first place.
Weight loss supplements are a hot topic right now. Not surprisingly, the FDA is considering completely banning weight loss claims for anything other than drugs. So far, they have hesitated because there aren’t many weight loss drugs and they often have horrifying side effects. But if you haven’t taken action by writing the FDA to tell them not to ban supplement weight loss claims, please do so now.
One supplement much discussed for weight loss now is Garcinia cambogia, an extract from the Malabar tamarind. Studies in the 1960s and ’70s showed that Garcinia cambogia contains hydroxycitirc acid (HCA), which inhibits the enzyme ATP citrate lyase, diverting the conversion of carbs from fat to energy production instead. Furthermore, fatty acids in the body’s “fat pool” continue to be released, contributing to overall fat loss.
As Dr. Harry G. Preuss, MACN, CNS, a member of our board, points out in his paper “Garcinia Cambogia: How to Optimize Effects,” the quality of the Garcinia extract is important—it must contain a minimum of 50% HCA, and must not be composed wholly of calcium salts as this would decrease bioavailability. Potassium and/or magnesium should be present (both increase bioavailability), and a product with low lactone content is recommended. It must also be taken on an empty stomach (at least 30 to 60 minutes before a meal), because otherwise it will bind to components in the meal and be inactivated. (This is called the “food effect,” and it can reduce bioavailability of many different supplements besides HCA).
Garcinia provides an object lesson in using supplements wisely. It is never as simple as just taking a pill. The formulation is important; the co-factors are important; and your individual body chemistry is important. Always consult a knowledgeable professional.
Besides Garcinia cambogia, there are curcumin and cinnamon, which control blood sugar levels; magnesium, chromium, amino acids, and green tea, which help with weight loss; and Irvingia gabonesis supplements (derived from a wild mango from central and western Africa), which has showed impressive weight loss effects in a recent ten-week RCT.
For more suggestions, including the importance of good fats, the right kind of exercise, and metabolic typing, see our earlier article, “Natural Solutions for Losing Weight.”

The post Gastric Bypass Surgery for Everyone! first appeared on Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health.

High Blood Pressure? Not To Worry—Why Not Just Burn Away Overactive Nerves Deep in Your Body?

Tue, 24 Jul 2012 16:00:41 +0000

There are better, natural alternatives to this new high-tech out-of-control approach to lowering your blood pressure.

It is estimated that 76.4 million people in the US have high blood pressure—1.2 billion people worldwide. Of course, the definition of what constitutes high blood pressure keeps changing, with the not-so-coincidental result that drug companies sell more and more drugs. More than 42 million people in the US currently take drugs to curb hypertension.
Many of these people do need to get their blood pressure down. It isn’t all about selling drugs. But here’s the rub: the drugs often don’t work or work well enough. So dozens of hospitals and scientists are testing a profoundly invasive new procedure: a catheter is threaded through blood vessels in the groin up into the kidneys to literally burn away overactive nerves deep in the body that are thought to contribute to rising blood pressure.
Nerves in the body’s fight-or-flight system play a role in signaling kidney functions, which in turn may affect blood pressure, such as by relaxing or tightening key arteries. Sometimes those nerves stay switched on when they shouldn’t be—which blood pressure drugs can’t address. The problem is that some people have overactive nervous systems, so blood pressure can be high even in situations that are not dangerous. At least that’s the theory. The medical industry’s hope is that destroying some of the nerves will calm an overactive system, relaxing arteries and lowering blood pressure.
Will this work for you? Maybe, maybe not. And what about the potential side effects? They include bleeding, injured blood vessels, immediate blood pressure or heart problems, and complications from the medications used during procedure. Of course, these are just the known short-term side effects. No one yet knows what the long-term side effects might be.
The procedure promises to be incredibly lucrative because of the huge number of people in the world who have high blood pressure. Companies offering the equipment could make between $1.5 billion and $4.4 billion annually and then there is the cost of performing this complicated procedure. Medtronic currently leads the market with its nerve cell burning device, but competitors are developing other devices as well. The procedure is already approved in Europe and Asia, though still going through approval process in the US. Researchers are also considering using the same approach to lower blood sugar, control sleep apnea, and ease heart failure and kidney disease. In time, maybe all of these uses will be candidates to burn our nerves! Sounds almost as good as the bloodletting that doctors insisted on in the 18th and earlier centuries.
As noted above, hypertension drugs are big business, even when they don’t work, so why stop them after the procedure? It is no surprise that many patients are given these same hypertension drugs after the invasive nerve-deadening surgery—ensuring pharmaceutical profits both before and after the procedure.
All of this completely ignores what integrative medicine has known all along: that high blood pressure is a symptom of other problems. It may stem from a poor fatty acid profile, other diet issues, obesity, high stress levels, insulin resistance, and other conditions. Dr. Jonathan Wright and others have also pointed out the link between heavy metal toxicity and high blood pressure.
It should be obvious that eliminating the symptom doesn’t solve the problem. Even if you get your blood pressure to perfectly normal levels, if you haven’t addressed the underlying imbalance, your health may not improve. This is a central tenet of integrative health. It’s about getting to the root of the problem—not just applying a Band-Aid, or worse, undergoing dangerous surgery.
Dr. Joseph A. Mercola advocates a natural approach to lowering your blood pressure:

Control you blood sugar: In a 1998 study, two-thirds of patients who were insulin-resistant also had high blood pressure. Regulating blood sugar levels—which means cutting out sweets, starchy foods, and even grains—may bring blood pressure into a healthy range.
Reduce your stress: The link between the stress and high blood pressure has been well established. Although some highly stressed individuals have perfectly normal pressure, changing your lifestyle to lessen stress and managing your emotional life more effectively may help you regulate your blood pressure.
Get your fatty acid profile right: Most people get far too much omega-6 fatty acid (found in corn, soy, canola, safflower, and sunflower oils) in their diets, and far too little omega-3s (found among other places in walnuts, flaxseeds, and fish). Make sure you’re getting enough omega-3 fats through diet and supplementation.
Watch your caffeine intake: Though the connection is not understood, there is evidence that too much caffeine can make hypertension worse.
Lose weight: If you lose the excess fat and maintain your weight loss, you can reduce blood pressure in the long term. It is important to eat to your own specific nutritional needs.
Get moving: Studies suggest that aerobic exercise is important for—and best at—lowering blood pressure.
Get enough vitamin D: Vitamin D deficiency, which is linked to insulin resistance and metabolic syndrome, increases parathyroid hormone production, increasing blood pressure. D is also a negative inhibitor of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) which regulates blood pressure.

Dr. Mercola also recommends taking calcium and magnesium, vitamins C and E, and olive leaf extract to help control high blood pressure. Dr. Wright also suggests potassium for hypertension.
And there are also other foods besides omega-3 oils that can lower your numbers significantly: natto, celery, and beets. Alternatively one can use supplements: nattokinase or celery or beet extract.

The post High Blood Pressure? Not To Worry—Why Not Just Burn Away Overactive Nerves Deep in Your Body? first appeared on Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health.

And Yet Another Brain Threat: Statin Drugs

Tue, 10 Jul 2012 16:00:14 +0000

These widely-used cholesterol drugs can cause memory loss—there are even new warning labels about this and diabetes risk.

Statin drugs are huge money-makers for the drug companies. They’re touted as being able to lower cholesterol and thus reduce the risk of heart attack and heart disease. They also weaken the immune system and make it difficult to fight off bacterial infections; increase the production of cytokines, which trigger and sustain inflammation; deplete the essential nutrient Co-Q10; and have documented side effects. These include nerve damage, neurological problems (including Lou Gehrig’s Disease), muscle damage (don’t forget that the heart itself is a muscle), liver enzyme derangement, and in some cases even kidney failure, not to mention tendon problems, anemia, acidosis, cataracts, and sexual dysfunction.
Moreover, as we reported in January, statin drugs increase one’s risk of developing diabetes. A 2010 meta-analysis found that statin therapy of any dosage was associated with 9% greater diabetes risk.
The FDA should pull all statins. But at least there are some new label warnings, however mild. Now the consumer may read about the risk of memory loss and confusion. But the FDA adds: “These reports generally have not been serious and the patients’ symptoms were reversed by stopping the statin. However, patients should still alert their health care professional if these symptoms occur.”
New labels also include a warning that increased blood sugar levels (hyperglycemia) and an increased risk of being diagnosed with type 2 diabetes have been reported with statin use. We wonder how long it will take for FDA to add warnings, however mild, about bacterial infections, neurological problems, muscle damage, anemia, and sexual dysfunction. (“Never mind the sexual dysfunction,” the drug manufacturers will say. “We have a pill for that!”)

The post And Yet Another Brain Threat: Statin Drugs first appeared on Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health.

A New Diet Pill Hits the Market

Tue, 03 Jul 2012 16:00:53 +0000

Lose very little weight, and gain lots of nasty side effects!

FDA has just approved a new weight loss drug called Belviq. It’s the first new prescription drug for long-term weight loss to enter US in over a decade. As we noted in February, the pharmaceutical industry is desperate for new blockbuster drugs. The patents on their biggest money-making drugs are expiring, which will cause drug prices and profits to plummet when generic versions become available, so the drug-makers are in a frenzy to find a new pill for a mass market.
Whether Belviq is that golden ticket is in serious doubt. First off, the weight loss it achieves is extremely modest—only 47% of patients lost more than 5% of their body weight over a year’s time, with the average patient losing between 3% and 3.7%. In other words, if you weighed 200 pounds, you might lose about seven pounds over the course of a year.
Then there are the acknowledged side effects: depression, migraines, memory lapses, and attention disturbances. But for some reason, FDA thinks the benefits of taking an expensive pill to lose a tiny bit of weight outweigh the crippling headaches, mental problems, and depression. Hey, maybe they can add an antidepressant in there and make it a “two-fer”! That is exactly what they did with another diet drug, Contrave, which has not yet been approved.
Drug giant GlaxoSmithKline was just fined $2 billion because, among other violations, it marketed its antidepressant medications Paxil, Wellbutrin, and Avandia for unapproved uses—particularly for weight loss, even though there is no evidence it would be effective for this purpose. It is also worth noting that antidepressant drugs don’t even appear to work for depression and can be highly addictive. Someone trying to lose weight is not likely to know about the addiction problem or be told about it.
Oddly, those who lost at least 5% of their body weight using the newly approved Belviq were specifically not patients with Type 2 diabetes—yet the FDA approved it for overweight people with at least one weight-related health condition, such as Type 2 diabetes. Patients with diabetes may experience extra side effects, like low blood sugar, headache, back pain, cough and fatigue.
In 2010, FDA denied Belviq’s approval because of potential heart-valve risks and increased brain and breast tumor development. The drug’s manufacturer, Arena Pharmaceuticals, decided not to reformulate the drug—they merely submitted new studies that showed that it wasn’t a risk at low doses! Which of course means the risk still exists at high doses. That’s reassuring.
Belviq likely won’t be the only new diet drug on the market. Two other drugs have been resubmitted for approval. An FDA drug advisory panel has already recommended approval of one of them, Qnexa, a diet pill that has documented risks of causing birth defects and heart problems. FDA’s final decision is expected some time in July. The only other currently FDA-approved weight loss drug is Alli, which has particularly nasty side effects like oily stools and flatulence—not to mention causing vitamin deficiencies and possible liver damage.
Patrick O’Neil, president of the Obesity Society, said he was encouraged by Belviq’s approval because “it underscores the notion that lifestyle changes alone are not enough to treat obesity.” But he was also the lead researcher on several studies on Belviq.
There are certainly some excellent natural alternatives to help manage weight. One recent randomized, double-blind study points to the potential of unroasted coffee bean extract. The extract contains chlorogenic acid, which helps tame blood sugar spikes and decrease weight. Study participants lost an average of 17.6 lbs. and reduced their body fat, without changing the number of calories they consumed, the macronutrient ratios (protein, carbs, and fat) of what they consumed, or the amount they exercised. Just compare these numbers to the small gains under Belviq.
Best of all, 37% of the patients using coffee extract went from overweight (the pre-obesity range) back to their normal weight range. Other studies show that drinking twelve cups of coffee a day lowers the risk of diabetes by 67%. But few of us can (or should) drink that much coffee each day, so research into a coffee extract is extremely promising indeed.
Unfortunately, green coffee bean extract and other nutraceuticals are always vulnerable to a rapacious drug industry that might want to turn such natural substances into drugs. This is what precisely happened to pyradoxamine and could happen to P5P, the most bioavailable form of vitamin B6. The only barrier to this theft under FDA rules is that pharmaceutical companies prefer to rely on synthetic versions of natural substances because they can be patented, and the companies can then charge whatever they wish.
Readers may recall that drug giant GlaxoSmithKlein has actually petitioned the FDA to ban supplement companies from making weight loss claims—specifically, because obesity is a disease, and only drugs can claim to treat disease. The FDA has still not ruled on the petition, so please tell FDA you will not allow pharmaceutical companies to use the Citizen Petition process for their own financial gain. Please take action now with this Action Alert!

The post A New Diet Pill Hits the Market first appeared on Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health.

Are You Missing One of the Most Vital Ingredients in a Healthy Lifestyle?

Tue, 27 Mar 2012 21:50:00 +0000

Hint: it helps you lose weight and live longer, it’s enjoyable, you probably don’t do it nearly enough, and there’s important new research about it that you need to know.

According to Dr. Mark Hyman, besides eating whole foods and moving your body, the most important thing you can do for your health is to get enough sleep. Sleep deprivation makes you fat, and leads to depression, pain, heart disease, diabetes, and much more.
Even mainstream medicine agrees. In its report “Sleep Disorders and Sleep Deprivation: An Unmet Public Health Problem,” the Institute of Medicine recently estimated that 50 to 40 million Americans chronically suffer from a sleep disorder, hindering daily functioning and adversely affecting their health and longevity.
Harvard Health Publica points out that lack of sufficient sleep can have consequences ranging from the mild to the life-threatening:

A 2009 study in Archives of Internal Medicine showed that people who slept an average of less than seven hours per night were three times as likely to get sick from viral infections as those who averaged at least eight hours.
A 2008 article in the journal Obesity that analyzed findings from 36 different studies of sleep duration and body weight found that lack of sufficient sleep tends to disrupt hormones that control hunger and appetite, and the resulting daytime fatigue often discourages you from exercising. A recent US survey found that the states reporting the most sleep problems—West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Mississippi, and Alabama—also have the highest obesity rates.
A 2009 report found health difficulties in people with persistent insomnia (sleeping less than six hours per night): a threefold increase in the risk of type 2 diabetes, and a three-and-a-half times greater risk of high blood pressure.
A study of about 1,000 young adults found that, compared with normal sleepers, insomniacs were four times as likely to develop major depression within three years. Sleep problems in the teenagers preceded depression 69% of the time and anxiety disorders 27% of the time.
A Japanese heart disease study noted a 1.3-fold increase in mortality in sleep-deprived patients compared with those who got sufficient sleep. Severe sleep apnea raises the risk of dying early by 46%. Although only about 8% of the men in the study had severe apnea, those who did and who were between 40 and 70 years of age were twice as likely to die from any cause as healthy men in the same age group.

Teenagers are taking classes earlier and earlier, with buses picking kids up at 5:45 a.m. and classes starting at 6:30 a.m. But is this good for their health? A coalition of Virginia parents, teachers, and administrators says no: adolescents on average need 9¼ hours of sleep per night, but average only 7½ hours of sleep per night (with 25 percent sleeping 6½ hours or less).
Sleep deprivation affects teens’ ability to think, perform, and react appropriately and safely, including when driving a car. As parents know, teenagers for some reason naturally become night owls and late risers. Band practice at dawn doesn’t help. Since sleep deprivation contributes to depression, and adolescent brains are undergoing dramatic chemical changes, going without sleep to accommodate a school schedule may also set them up for a dangerous SSRI prescription.
How much sleep do the rest of us need? According to the National Sleep Foundation, adults need between 7 and 9 hours of sleep each night, keeping in mind that individual needs vary and it is important to listen to your body. Similar recommendations come from mainstream and integrative medical experts.
Here are a few vital tips for improving your sleep:

A healthy diet and vigorous exercise help tremendously in allowing your body to fall asleep naturally.
Get regular exposure to daylight for at least 20 minutes daily — the light from the sun enters your eyes and triggers your brain to secrete and then release specific chemicals and hormones like melatonin that are vital to healthy sleep.
Honor the natural circadian rhythm—sleep when it’s dark, wake when it’s light. Studies suggest that this will make a tremendous contribution to overall health. It’s not really surprising. Our bodies evolved with sunlight, not electrical lights.
Don’t use artificial light in the evening after going to bed—it shuts down melatonin release. Any sort of light can suppress melatonin release, but recent experiments have pointed the finger at one type in particular: the blue wavelengths produced by many kinds of energy-efficient light bulbs and electronic gadgets. Computer monitors, cell phones, and LED television screens are especially bad. Special glasses to remove blue light will help protect you if you must turn on lights after going to bed. A special nightlight with a red wavelength can make all the difference if you need a nightlight. (None of this should be surprising. Blue light is the light of dawn. No wonder your body is confused when your computer flashes blue lights in the wee hours of the night! And those people who, unable to sleep, get up and turn on their cell phone or computer or iPad are doing the worst thing they possibly can. Maybe we all need to learn to count sheep again.)
Avoid both alcohol and caffeine 4 to 6 hours before bedtime.
Make the room you’re sleeping in as dark and quiet as possible. A cool (though not cold) room is often the most sleep-inducing. If you can’t get away from noise, install some white noise from an air cleaner or similar source. This will cover the other noise and not interfere with sleep. When traveling, you can use some soft ear plugs made by Flynt.
Dr. Mehmet Oz recommends melatonin if you are having trouble going to sleep, but notes that the commonly listed dosage (five milligrams) is more than what most people require; instead, he recommends starting with one milligram and work up to 2.5 milligrams if necessary. Up to 5 or 6 milligrams might be needed on special occasions, such as when you are jet lagged. Melatonin (taken at your new bedtime at the travel destination) is by far the best cure for jet lag.
It is not surprising that melatonin is such an effective supplement. It is the same substance that our bodies use to put us to sleep. It is also a highly important antioxidant and a vital part of our immune system. No wonder our immune systems do so much of their work at night when we are asleep! One word of caution however: a small minority of melatonin supplement users report that it gives them overly vivid dreams. In the unlikely event that you experience this, you can simply discontinue use.
Dr. Hyman also mentions melatonin, and recommends trying supplements like 320 mg to 480 mg of valerian one hour before bedtime; 200 to 400 mg of magnesium citrate or glycinate before bed to calm the nervous system and muscles; as well as theanine (an amino acid from green tea), GABA, magnolia, and 5-HTP. Other authorities mention passionflower for its calming effects. Passionflower can also be used during the day.5-HTP is a close relative of the amino acid tryptophan, which the body needs to make serotonin. When anti-depression drugs (which inhibit the break down of serotonin) first appeared, the FDA banned tryptophan as a supplement, using one contaminated batch as the excuse. Tryptophan is now once again available as a supplement, although at a much higher price than before. It should be taken at night, preferably with a bite of food, such as a few walnuts and a bit of fruit, which will help you make use of the tryptophan.
GABA in particular is the natural hormone that calms us down from an over-anxious state, but many GABA supplements either don’t seem to get through the stomach or else fail to work effectively for some other reason. Pharma GABA by Thorne is effective, although some other brands may work as well.

In general, though, the key to getting a good night’s sleep isn’t supplements. It is sleeping while it is dark and avoiding light, especially blue light, once you have gone to bed.

The post Are You Missing One of the Most Vital Ingredients in a Healthy Lifestyle? first appeared on Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health.

FDA Advisory Panel Green-Lights Toxic Weight Loss Pill

Tue, 28 Feb 2012 18:00:36 +0000

The FDA had previously rejected this very same drug for safety reasons. So how do they explain the sudden flip-flop?

Last week, the FDA’s Endocrinologic and Metabolic Drug Advisory Committee voted 20 to 2 to recommend approval of Qnexa, a diet pill that has documented risks of causing birth defects and heart problems. The committee’s approval pretty much paves the way for full FDA approval. If approved, Qnexa would be the first new prescription weight-loss medication since 1999. There is only one other diet prescription medication currently on the market: Orlistat (marketed under the trade name Xenical), which tends to cause loose, oily stools, along with a host of other possible side effects, some of which may be serious.
Qnexa was rejected twice, once in October 2010 over heart risk concerns, and again in January 2011 because one of its ingredients can cause cleft lips in the children of women who take it. Qnexa is a combination of two existing drugs, the appetite suppressant phentermine and the anti-seizure medication topiramate. Both have serious risks.
PubMed Health lists 63 side effects for topiramate. It can prevent you from sweating and make it harder for your body to cool down when it gets very hot. It can also harm fetuses and cause birth defects, cause kidney stones and osteoporosis, and alter your mental health “in unexpected ways” and cause you to become suicidal. Last year, the FDA reclassified topiramate as a class D drug, meaning that it carries risks to a fetus but may still be acceptable for use in pregnant women despite the risks!
Side effects of phentermine include cardiovascular adverse effects (heart palpitations, dizziness, chest pain, edema, and increased blood pressure), not to mention vomiting and diarrhea. Other reported adverse effects include convulsions, hallucinations, hostility with urge to attack, mania followed by depression, and panic.
Put the two together and you have a real winner of a diet drug! What’s more, diet drugs often exert their weight loss effects only while the drug is being taken. This promotes “yo-yo dieting,” which leads to more weight gain and is more likely to increase the risk of heart attack, metabolic syndrome, diabetes, and other serious health problems.
Does anyone imagine that the average overweight patient who is prescribed this drug will have a clue what’s in it, or what they could be letting themselves in for?
Officials for Vivus Inc., Qnexa’s manufacturer, have proposed a “tightly controlled system” for prescribing Qnexa to prevent birth defects, including “limits on which pharmacies can dispense the medication, such as registered mail-order pharmacies.” Of course, we can think of another way to prevent birth defects or cardiovascular problems from Qnexa: don’t approve it in the first place! As Dr. Sidney Wolfe, director of the Health Research Group at Public Citizen, points out, “Diet drug history is littered with those banned only after they found out about cardiovascular risk areas.”
What is causing the reckless and irrational approval of such an obviously dangerous drug? One of the driving forces is the pharmaceutical industry’s sense of panic. The patents on their biggest money-making drugs are expiring, which will cause drug prices (and profits) to plummet when generic versions become available. So Big Pharma is desperate for new blockbuster drugs—and FDA is beholden to the pharmaceutical industry. The drug industry, having been exposed for over-hyping the “cholesterol problem” for the sake of its own profit, now sees the obesity epidemic as the next opportunity for exploitation.
Predictably, according to investment experts, Qnexa is poised to become “the next Lipitor” (as if that’s a good thing!). The cholesterol drug Lipitor had $10.7 billion in sales in 2010 before losing patent protection last year. Analysts say Qnexa, if approved, may generate $448 million in sales in 2015.
With so few weight loss medications on the market and obesity at epidemic levels in America, the panel felt that the risks posed by obesity outweighed the drug’s side effects. Dr. David Katz, of the Yale Prevention Research Center, said, “This is far from a great drug. The FDA panel recommended approval of Qnexa only because the ranks of useful weight loss drugs are so thin, and desperate times call for desperate measures. Approval of Qnexa would reflect that…desperation.”
The irony, of course, is that healthy, natural solutions for weight loss and management are being ignored, as we explained in our popular article on the subject. And just last week, natural health expert Dr. Joseph A. Mercola explained how eating fat does not make a person fat—but the overconsumption of carbohydrates does: “Overeating carbohydrates can prevent a higher percentage of fats from being used for energy, and lead to an increase in fat production and storage. It also raises your insulin levels, which in short order can cause insulin resistance, followed by diabetes. Insulin resistance is also at the heart of virtually every chronic disease known to modern man.”
The FDA is expected to decide by April 17 whether or not to accept the advisory panel’s recommendation to approve Qnexa. The agency usually follows the recommendations of its advisory panels but is not required to do so.
How outrageous is it that FDA will consider green-lighting an incredibly toxic drug, but won’t let supplement producers make weight loss claims for safe, natural products? FDA has created a situation where consumers cannot be told about the health benefits of nutritional supplements and natural foods because FDA is censoring the manufacturers. This forces consumers into a situation where they only hear the endless advertisements from drug makers and major media—something that will increase dramatically if Qnexa gets approved.

A drug manufacturer has petitioned FDA to stop supplement producers from even mentioning the words “weight” or “weight loss” in ads. If the FDA agrees, food or supplement competition for weight loss drugs will be wiped out in one stroke. Don’t let them think we’ve fallen asleep on this issue—take action now!

The post FDA Advisory Panel Green-Lights Toxic Weight Loss Pill first appeared on Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health.

Too Much Sitting Is Killing Us

Tue, 03 Jan 2012 21:06:55 +0000

Studies say that even moderate to vigorous exercise doesn’t counteract the damage.

A study published in the American Heart Association’s journal Circulation showed that each extra hour of television watching (the ultimate sitting sedentary activity) per day was associated with an 18% increase in deaths from heart disease and an 11% increase in overall mortality. People who watched TV for at least four hours a day were 80% more likely to die of cardiovascular disease than those who watched two hours or less, and 46% more likely to die of any cause.
We have smart readers, and many of you will immediately ask: “Weren’t there other factors, not just sitting, that resulted in this outcome?” Yet that doesn’t seem to be the case. There are specific reasons why sitting, in itself, appears to be dangerous. The message seems to be to move around. But if you aren’t moving around, stand or lie down, which humans have done throughout their history. Avoid sitting in a chair, an activity that is relatively new for human beings and not at all good for us.
Surprising as it is, the increase in heart and mortality risk observed in the Circulation study affected people who met exercise guidelines—and were independent of eating habits as well! Studies reported significant associations between total sedentary time with blood glucose, blood lipids, and adiposity, even in people who performed moderate to vigorous exercise several times each week.
Animal studies also show that how much time we are sedentary is related to how well our bodies process fats. The studies in rats show that leg muscles only produce the lipase lipoprotein (fat-processing) molecule when they are being actively flexed—that is, when standing or, better still, walking around—and low levels of the molecule are associated with health problems, including heart disease. In short, sitting makes this important molecule slow down. In fact, actively contracting the muscles produces a whole suite of substances that have a beneficial effect on how the body uses and stores sugars and fats.
“Many people, on a daily basis, simply shift from one chair to another—from the seat in the car to the chair in the office to the chair in front of the television,” said to the lead author of the study. “Even if someone has a healthy body weight, sitting for long periods still has an unhealthy influence on blood sugar and blood fats.”
It should be noted that sitting too much is not the same as exercising too little. They do completely different things to the body. Standing recruits specialized muscles designed for low-intensity activity—muscles that are very rich in enzymes. The lipoprotein lipase enzyme grabs fat and cholesterol from the blood, burning the fat into energy while shifting the cholesterol from LDL (the bad kind) to HDL (the healthy kind). When you sit, the muscles are relaxed, and enzyme activity drops by 90% to 95%, leaving fat to camp out in the bloodstream. Within a couple hours of sitting, healthy cholesterol plummets by 20%.
A Canadian study reached a similar conclusion. After adjusting for potential compounding factors (smoking, exercise levels, etc.), the study found that the longer people sat, the higher the risk of mortality from all causes except cancer.
The good news is that inserting breaks into your sedentary periods can help. Periodically taking time out from your computer, desk, television, and driving time to walk, move around, stretch, and flex your muscles, is good for you. These spurts of activity are associated with a smaller waist circumference, lower body mass index, and lower blood lipid levels, and better glucose metabolism.
A stand up desk might be a good idea as well. Don’t have room for one? Too expensive? Then pile some books or something else on top of your existing desk and put your laptop where you can type standing up when you want to, either often or as a break.
At ANH-USA, we believe that true health comes from a combination of diet (and supplements), exercise, and lifestyle. Politically, so much is happening regarding supplements and diet that we spend most of our newsletter space focusing on those areas. But science tells us that our lifestyle choices—simple decisions made daily—can make a huge impact on our health, for good or for ill.

The post Too Much Sitting Is Killing Us first appeared on Alliance for Natural Health USA - Protecting Natural Health.