Low-Dose Naltrexone and Dietary Changes for the Treatment of Autoimmune Diseases

And you see a similar pattern in cancer patients - as soon as they start taking this, their health rapidly declines as their immune system falters. And guess what - when you eat either of these two foods, they trigger it at lower levels.

July 3, 2016 

Story at-a-glance

• Naltrexone is an opiate antagonist, originally developed in the early 1960s for the treatment of opioid addiction. When taken at very low doses (LDN), it triggers endorphin production, which can boost your immune function
• Gluteomorphins (from gluten) and caseomorphins (from casein) act as exogenous opioids that suppress immune function. Hence an autoimmune diet needs to be free of gluten and dairy
• LDN is most effective when combined with an autoimmune diet, free of gluten and dairy, rich in fresh and fermented vegetables, with low to modest amounts of high-quality protein

By Dr. Mercola

Most people are aware that drugs are not an ideal solution to their health problems, but there are some exceptions to this rule.

Dr. Thomas Cowan, a family physician and founding board member of the Weston A. Price Foundation (WAPF), is a strong proponent of using low-dose naltrexone (LDN) for autoimmune diseases.

What Is Naltrexone?

Naltrexone is an opiate antagonist, originally developed in the early 1960s for the treatment of opioid addiction (such as heroin), which was prevalent at that time. It blocks the effects of the narcotic by attaching to opioid receptors in your body.

"Naltrexone is a pure opiate antagonist; meaning it has no agonist. Agonist means it has a positive effect. It has no agonist effect. It has no analgesic effect. There's no euphoria. There's no high. It simply blocks the opiates,"Cowan explains. 

For heroin overdoses, a dose of about 30 to 50 milligrams (mg) of naltrexone was, and still is, used to prevent the fatal respiratory depression from a narcotic overdose.

However, the drug not only blocks exogenous narcotic opiates. Many drug users refused to take naltrexone because it made them feel terrible, and this led to the discovery of endorphins.

Endorphins are endogenous opiates, meaning they're not introduced from the outside. They're naturally produced by your body. This was why people suffered dysphoria (the opposite of euphoria) when taking naltrexone, as the drug blocked the natural opioids (endorphins) as well.

The Discovery of Low-Dose Naltrexone and Its Benefits

Dr. Bernard Bihari1 began taking an interest in naltrexone in the late 1980s, as many of his addicted patients also had immunological problems. Many of them had AIDS, which is a cell-mediated immune collapse.

He observed that virtually the only patients dying from HIV infection were those using opiates. He wondered whether endogenous opiates might have something to do with immunological function, which has since been shown to be the case in thousands of studies.

"He decided that maybe these people with immunological problems have endorphin deficiencies," Cowan says. "That led him to try to figure out a way to stimulate endorphin production.

He [discovered that] if you use a very low dose of naltrexone, you block the opiate receptors for maybe an hour or so, and then your body responds by upregulating its synthesis of opiates.

You end up with a hundred or a thousand times more endorphins and a better-functioning immune system."

Essentially, when using a very LOW dose, about one-tenth of the dose you'd use for opioid addiction, or less, naltrexone works like a form of hormesis, which is when a compound that is toxic at high doses ends up having the converse effect in small or minute doses.

"LDN is probably the only pharmaceutical medicine I routinely use," Cowan says. "I have seen more people get better with that medicine than any other medicine I've ever used.

When you look at natural medicine, for instance: ginseng stimulates adrenal cortical function. It doesn't actually do anything itself; it just stimulates your adrenal gland to make something. That's typically how natural medicines work. That's the whole philosophy of homeopathy.

Similarly, even though it's not actually a 'natural medicine,' LDN stimulates endorphin production. It doesn't actually do anything positive itself. The patient has to respond.

If they don't respond, you don't get an effect. If they do respond and they make more endorphins, like they would have had with a natural medicine, then you get a positive effect from a normal amount of endorphin production."

LDN Dosing Recommendations

The normal range for LDN is between 1.5 and 4.5 mg per day, taken about an hour before bedtime (not in the morning). There are a couple of reasons for this timing.

First, since you're blocking endorphins, doing it in the middle of the night prevents you from noticing that you feel lousy. Second, the endorphin response is greater at nighttime. As for side effects, LDN has an enviable safety profile. The most common side effect is unusual and sometimes more vivid dreams.

Cowan typically starts patients out at 1.5 mg for two weeks. Sensitive people, such as those with thyroid problems, may start as low as 1 mg per day, but as a general rule, doses lower than 1.5 mg/day tend to be ineffective for most adults.

If there's a positive effect, the patient will stay on that dose. If there's no effect, the dose is increased to 3 mg per day. If there's a negative effect, the dose is decreased.

If there's a positive effect at 3 mg, stay on that dose. If there's still no effect, raise it to 4.5 mg, and if there's a negative effect, decrease the dose. That said, the key to LDN is the low dose. So many times you may actually need to lower the dose if you don't notice a beneficial effect.

"If you gave somebody 2.5 mg and it didn't work, lower the dose. You gave him 1.5 mg and it didn't work, give it every other day," Cowan says. "Because the principle is it's the rebound that's the positive effect, not the drug. With normal drugs, if it doesn't work you give more, but here, it's the opposite."

Opiates Are Potent Immunosuppressive Drugs

A famous study called the European Prostitute Study showed the primary risk factor for HIV and AIDS was not sexual exposure, not IV exposure, but opiate exposure.

According to Cowan, you see a similar pattern in cancer patients. As soon as they start taking opiates for chronic pain, their health rapidly declines as their immune system falters.

"Opiates are highly immunosuppressive medicines," he explains. "What I mean by opiates is exogenous opiates; opiates from the outside. Bihari saw that. He saw that the people that were getting AIDS were opiate addicts. And not just that, but that was a certain subset.

Since endorphins are essentially the flipside of exogenous opiates, meaning endogenous opiates, what you're doing is substituting the good guys for the bad guys.

... In the late '90s, I had a very good friend who was diagnosed with terminal lymphoma. He actually knew Bihari. Bihari put him on 4.5 mg of LDN. He did IV vitamin C, and he went into remission. I went to Hawaii on vacation with them about three years ago. That's something like 15 years later. That was a situation that got my attention big time."

Cowan's Autoimmune Diet

Aside from opiate drugs like heroin and prescription painkillers, your diet can be a source of exogenous opiates. Many natural health physicians recommend removing wheat and dairy from the diet, as these foods tend to trigger complications in a large number of people.

What many don't realize is that part of the problem stems from the fact that gluteomorphins (from gluten) and caseomorphins (from casein) act as exogenous opioids.

"Basically, when you're doing this diet ... you're getting rid of exogenous opiates. It's really about getting rid of exogenous opiates (the ones that downregulate and cause dysfunction of your immune system) and then upregulating the endogenous or healthy endorphins," Cowan says.

Virtually anyone suffering with an autoimmune problem, be it multiple sclerosis (MS), inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), or Hashimoto's (autoimmune thyroid disease), just to name a few, would be wise to try a gluten- and dairy-free diet to help optimize immune function. (Grass-fed ghee can be used, as it's very low in casein.) 

In Cowan's experience, and he's prescribed LDN for at least 1,000 patients, the autoimmune diet or LDN alone are typically not nearly as effective as the two combined. Besides avoiding or eliminating gluten and dairy, his dietary recommendations are very similar to the Gut and Psychology Syndrome (GAPS) Diet.

"It's basically getting rid of the exogenous opiates and repairing the gut flora [with] fermented foods," Cowan says. "The Cowan Autoimmune Diet is animal foods that are low to modest in protein; seeds, but no grains for a while, and a diversity of vegetables and fermented foods."

Consider Eating a Wider Variety of Vegetables

Fresh vegetables, which are high in fiber, also help heal your gut by nourishing healthy microbes. Some bacteria also create short-chain fatty acids from the fiber, which are important for your health. One key is variety and diversity. Most Americans eat perhaps a dozen different kinds of vegetables in any given year, whereas our ancestors ate hundreds of different varieties.

Part of the problem is that most people only have access to seasonal vegetables sold in the grocery store. To amend this situation, Cowan grows his own. He has a large garden with about 60 different vegetable varieties, some of which are perennial, such as tree collards (collard greens that grow on trees).

"They're sort of deep green, deep purple vegetables. They live for about 12 to 15 years and withstand even down to about 10 degrees Fahrenheit. They'll withstand frost.

There's the perennial chard, which is the genetic precursor of beets and Swiss chard. There's Ashitaba. There's Gynura, which is Okinawa spinach. That's the spinach that is supposedly reputed to be why the Okinawans live so long. It has a chemical in it that has an effect similar to metformin. It's an anti-diabetic, essentially nutrient-rich food."

I believe anyone fully committed to health will inevitably and invariably come to the conclusion that they have to grow their own food, and pay attention to the soil quality. Aside from being hard to find commercially, perennial vegetables have the distinct advantage of growing and producing year-round.

"I recently read a statistic from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA): People who eat three to four different parts of the plant per day — we're talking about the root part, the leaf part, and the flower or fruit part; those are fundamental parts — have 40 percent less chronic disease than people who don't do that. I believe that.

We don't need vegetables for calories, fats and proteins. That's the role of the other foods in the diet. We eat them for phytonutrients, fiber to feed the microbiome, vitamins, minerals, things known and unknown.

Therefore, to eat a huge bowl of Romaine lettuce is sort of a waste of vegetable power. You want to have a salad with as many colors as you can get, as many parts of the plant as you can get, as much diversity as you can get. That's the role of vegetables in the traditional diet," Cowan says.  

"I would absolutely encourage everybody to grow their own vegetables. [My book even contains] the science of when vegetables are the most nutritious.

For example, zucchini should be eaten within a couple of hours after picking it, because the sugars degrade and the nutrients degrade, whereas lettuce actually likes it to be injured a little bit and then sit around for about 12 hours, so it actually makes more reactive chemicals to essentially heal itself. It's better eaten after about 12 hours."

More Information

In Cowan's experience, LDN can be an incredibly valuable healing aid. Many suffering with autoimmune diseases like MS, ulcerative colitis, Crohn's disease, pemphigus, or Graves' disease, for example, have been able to significantly improve or go into remission by incorporating LDN and changing their diet to avoid exogenous opioids found in wheat and dairy, and improving their gut health and nutrition with fermented and fresh vegetables.

Good resources where you can learn more about LDN and find doctors who use it include LowDoseNaltrexone.org andLDNScience.org. Linda Elsegood's book, "The LDN Book: How a Little-Known Generic Drug Low Dose Naltrexone Could Revolutionize Treatment for Autoimmune Diseases, Cancer, Autism, Depression, and More" is another great resource.

To learn more about growing and eating vegetables, pick up a copy of Cowan's new book, "How (& Why) to Eat More Vegetables." You can also find more information on his website, drcowansgarden.com.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2016/07/03/low-dose-naltrexone-for-autoimmune-disease.aspx

Milk: It doesn’t do a body good

If you’re of a certain age, you probably remember the ad campaign from the dairy industry, the one with the tagline “Milk, it does a body good.” And you probably also remember those cute magazine ads where some celebrity had a milk moustache, like a three-year-old.


19 June 2016

Newsletter #614
Lee Euler, Editor

If you’re of a certain age, you probably remember the ad campaign from the dairy industry, the one with the tagline “Milk, it does a body good.” And you probably also remember those cute magazine ads where some celebrity had a milk moustache, like a three-year-old.

Well, in a way the campaign was appropriate because age three is about when you should stop drinking milk. After the toddler stage, it doesn’t do a body good. In fact, it does a great deal of harm. Get this stuff out of your diet, for the following reasons. . .

Milk is linked to a slew of diseases and conditions, including prostate and ovarian cancer. Add to the list weight gain, diabetes, constipation, IBS, bloating and gas, allergies and skin conditions. . .

But don’t expect to hear this from your doctor, the media, or Uncle Sam.

Instead the milk industry makes these dubious claims, with the blessing of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. . .

1. It’s the consummate comfort food – wholesome and quintessentially American.
2. It reduces bone fractures and prevents osteoporosis.
3. It’s your best source of calcium.
4. You need it for vitamin D.
5. It’ll improve athletic performance and is the perfect post-workout recovery drink.
6. Everyone should consume at least 24 ounces per day.

The truth may be far less savory.

What about milk’s reputation as “Nature’s Perfect Food”? Dr. Mark Hyman, author of The Blood Sugar Solution, says that’s only true if you’re a cow. So it may be time to kill this “sacred cow.”

In terms of our evolution as a species (or, if you’re a fundamentalist, “the way God made us”), we were never meant to consume the milk of another species. Our bodies are programmed to consume only human breast milk, and only till about age two.

Milk’s hidden cancer connection

Science suggests there’s a link between dairy products and increased risk of prostate and testicular cancers, and possibly breast and ovarian cancer.

In the case of prostate cancer, several studies find an association to milk consumption. The Harvard Physician’s Health Study of 20,000 male doctors found that those consuming more than two dairy servings a day had an astounding 34 percent greater risk of prostate cancer than did those consuming little or no dairy.¹ Other studies confirm that.

Dairy boosts insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1), which promotes cancer cell growth.

IGF-1 is linked to breast cancer as well.

Calcium may be another culprit in prostate cancer. Too much can lower cancer-protective vitamin D.

As for ovarian cancer, galactose (a component of milk sugar lactose) may trigger the disease. An analysis of studies found that for every glass of milk (or 10 grams of lactose) consumed, ovarian cancer risk rose by 13 percent.²

On the other hand, a 2001 Norwegian study found that milk consumption reduced breast cancer risk in premenopausal women. But by only a tiny fraction… and premenopausal breast cancer is rare.

In Asia, where milk consumption is rare, the rate of breast cancer is lower than in the U.S. or Europe. There are probably other factors involved – lower red meat consumption, higher iodine consumption from sea products, who knows what else – but less milk probably translates to a lower cancer rate.

A hormone cocktail…

This dairy-created disaster may be linked to hormones. With every glass of milk, you get a chemical cocktail of some 60 hormones, including bovine growth hormone (rBGH), estrogen, progesterone, and more.

In 1970, one cow produced 9,700 pounds of milk in her lifetime. Today that same cow produces 19,000 pounds. This may sound great, but it’s not. Talk about factory farming!

That cow is being doped up on growth hormones that become a part of your “refreshing” glass of milk. Bovine growth hormone is a chemical additive, of course, but the natural components of milk are also troubling. . .

Casein is a protein found in all milk, human or animal. It’s linked to cancer and other chronic diseases. Dr. T. Colin Campbell (Cornell University) found that casein promotes cancer in every stage of development.

Apparently your immune cells attack casein proteins as foreign invaders. Here’s the real bummer: Milk proteins are similar enough to your own body’s proteins to confuse your immune cells into attacking your own body.

Casein is also exceedingly hard to digest. It sticks together like glue – as suggested by the cow on the front of Elmer’s glue. In fact, it’s a component in some glues.

What’s more, the milk sugar called lactose can’t be broken down beyond infancy – except for certain people of northern European descent who retain that ability into adulthood. You’ve probably heard of “lactose intolerance” – one of the most common causes of GI-tract problems. You can mitigate lactose intolerance by supplementing with the enzyme lactase – the baby hormone that most people no longer have after early childhood.

But the best move is to simply avoid lactose, i.e. milk.

Cultured dairy breaks down proteins we can’t naturally digest, enlisting the help of the bacterium Lactobacillus.

There are more reasons to consider ditching dairy.

Linked to type 1 diabetes

The scientific literature is clear that milk can trigger destruction of insulin-producing pancreatic beta cells in genetically predisposed people.

A study of 1,113 at-risk infants showed that those receiving special insulin-free cow’s milk developed 61% fewer beta cell autoantibodies by age 3 than did those on regular cow’s milk.

This seems to prove the problem with drinking milk of another species. The protein in cows’ milk – especially the beta-casein A1 molecule – is dramatically different than that found in human breast milk.

Dr. Mark Hyman also cites a study in the Journal of the American Medical Association linking milk to weight gain, diabetes, constipation, bloating and gas, irritable bowel syndrome, allergies, eczema, and increased fracture risk (even though milk is rich in calcium).

Wait… you’re saying I’m MORE likely to suffer a fracture?

It’s been hammered into our heads that we should drink at least three glasses of milk a day to prevent bone fractures.

You’ve seen the “Got Milk?” ads, right?

Walter Willett, M.D. and chairman of the nutrition department at Harvard School of Public Health, calls that heresy.

When he and his team reviewed six studies of nearly 200,000 women, they were shocked.

Not only was there zero evidence milk was preventive for fractures, but get this: a 60,000-person Swedish study found that women drinking 21+ ounces per day had a stunning 60 percent higher risk of hip fractures. And hip fractures can be deadly.

Remember, you can’t digest it

Despite the propaganda of dairy industry commercials, it’s a proven fact most people cannot digest dairy.

Today, an estimated 62.2 million Americans will consume dairy they cannot digest. Does that strike you as a healthy thing to do?

In fact, lactose intolerance is so common and the dairy industry so heavily promoted that most people never connect the dots between dairy and their gassiness, bloating, diarrhea or other symptoms — let alone cancer, which doesn’t develop until years later.

That’s besides full-blown dairy allergies, which can cause hives and other rashes, vomiting, and even anaphylactic shock.

What about raw and organic milk?

That’s the $64,000 question.

Most studies use conventional milk, so we don’t have much hard evidence about raw.

On the one hand, ditching huge amounts of pesticides, herbicides, and growth hormones can’t be all bad. But the lactose, insulin, and casein can still be a problem. Anecdotally, a couple of people I know with lactose intolerance have told me they don’t have a reaction to raw milk.

That may be, but there are so many other questionable ingredients in milk, I think it’s still a risky food to eat.

To find out if raw milk is even available legally in your state, go to http://www.realmilk.com/state-updates/. In my state, Virginia, it’s next to impossible to get. You pretty much have to own your own dairy cow.

Some doctors suggest taking a two-to-four-week hiatus from all dairy, reintroduce it (raw organic, if possible), assess how you feel, and decide from there if you can safely consume milk.

Personally, the sum total of dairy I use is half-and-half in coffee (which I rarely drink), plus a rare treat of ice cream, along with a very limited amount of cheese. These are all special treats, not daily items in my diet. And if I had cancer, I wouldn’t even touch the rare treat.

Here are some practical ways to slash your dairy load:

1. Replace milk or half-and-half with coconut milk in recipes.
2. Get calcium from dark leafy greens like kale, turnip greens, beet greens, broccoli, dried beans, almonds and almond butter, chia seeds, coconut milk, and quinoa.
3. Try your hand at nut-based “cheeses.” Vegan cookbooks can guide you.
4. Drink water instead of milk. Save cheese for special occasions, like maybe your periodic pizza fix.
5. If you must have dairy, make it cultured, preferably raw (i.e. not pasteurized), non-homogenized, and organic.
6. I’m told you can make your own coconut milk “ice cream” and “whipped cream.” I haven’t tried it myself.
7. Try sheep or goat milk and cheese.

Our last issue talked about what might be the most unlikely cancer risk you’ll ever hear. But it’s for real. If you missed the news, we’re rerunning it just below.

---

This Cancer Risk Factor Could Be
Genetic, Environmental or Both –
That’s The Long & Short of It

Here’s a fact that has fascinated scientists for decades: Your risk of cancer is associated with how tall you are.

No one is quite sure why. Is it influenced by our genes, our environment or both? Even after hundreds of studies the jury is still out. But what is now accepted is that the link is real.

What’s more, the risk has been growing for the last 150 years, because on average people have been getting taller. Here’s the full story. . .

As height increases, so does cancer risk

Colorectal Cancer: In a meta-analysis of 16 studies, participants in the top height categories had between 20% and 60% increased risk compared to those in the bottom height categories.

For instance, in a study of over a million Norwegians, 6,397 men developed colon cancer and 4,393 developed rectal cancer. The figures for women were 7,620 and 3,482.

They were divided into five groups according to height, ranging from the shortest one-fifth to the tallest one-fifth. That put about 200,000 men in each group.

Men in the top height group had a 37% increased risk of colon cancer and a 17% increased risk of rectal cancer compared to those in the bottom height group. For women the figures were 35% and 18%.

In another group of 13 studies that combined the results of 5,287 cases of colorectal cancer, there was a consistent height/cancer association with the tallest men and women having a 31% increased risk compared to the shortest.

In April, 2016, Guillaume Onyeaghala of the University of Minnesota reported on a new study at the annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research. It showed that the group in the top quarter of leg length were 42% more likely to get colon cancer than those in the bottom quarter.

And those with the very longest legs (35.4 inches) had a 91% greater risk than those with the shortest legs (31.1 inches).

Prostate Cancer: Most of the 22 studies analyzed reported a 20% to 40% increased risk in those in the top height categories compared to the bottom.

In a study of 22,071 US male physicians, there were 1,047 cases of prostate cancer. The doctors who were more than 6 feet tall had a 26% greater risk compared to those under 5 feet 7 inches.

In another study of 47,781 US male health professionals, 1,369 were diagnosed with prostate cancer. Those 6 feet 2 inches or taller were found to be at a 37% greater risk of this common cancer than those 5 feet 8 inches tall, or less.

The researchers also reported “that tallness had a strong direct association with risk of metastatic disease,” with an increased risk of 68%.

Breast Cancer: In a group of 24 studies there was an increased risk ranging from 10% to 60% in the tallest height categories compared to the shortest.

In a study of 62,573 women aged 55 to 69 from the Netherlands, 626 had breast cancer after a four year follow up. The researchers found “a significantly positive association between adult height and breast cancer.” The risk for women over 5 feet 9 inches was double that of women who were 5 feet or less.

Endometrial/uterine cancer: Above average versus below average heights of 570,000 Norwegian women were compared. The 2,208 women with uterine cancer who were taller than average had a 20% greater risk.

The conclusion of another study that compared women with endometrial cancer with those free of the disease (controls) concluded that “women with endometrial cancer were significantly taller than control women.”

Other cancers: Increasing height has been found to increase the risk of a number of other cancers.

In 2010 the British Journal of Cancer published a study which showed that for every additional two inches of height the risk of developing testicular cancer increased by 13%. The relationship has also been found in cancers of the blood, lymphatic system, thyroid, ovary and some others.

Are the studies reliable?

One of the problems with conducting population studies is that it isn’t always clear what is being measured. For instance, taller people will tend to weigh more, so it may be weight that correlates with cancer and not height.

Higher socioeconomic status is also associated with greater stature. To put it bluntly, rich and powerful people also tend to be taller, on average. Perhaps such people are more health conscious and are more likely to request screening, which detects cancer at an early stage.

The number of potential biases in such research (confounding factors) can seriously skew the results.

The very best studies use very large population sizes and take as many confounding factors into account as they can. However, most studies have suffered to some degree from such biases.

The biggest studies confirm the link

The biggest study of its kind involved over five million Swedish people over a 50-year period.

The researchers discovered that for every four-inch increase in height, the risk of developing any form of cancer increased by 11% in men and 18% in women. The risk of malignant melanoma increased by 32% in men and 27% in women. The analysis took education and income into account.

The Million Women Study of 2011 is the most reliable of all the studies because it included 1,300,000 women and took a huge number of factors into account.

For every four inches above 5 feet, the cancer risk increased by 16% for 10 different cancers. Women in the study who were more than 5 feet 9 inches tall were 37% more likely to develop cancer than those under 5 feet.

The researchers took into account year of birth, socioeconomic factors, alcohol intake, body mass index, physical activity, age at puberty, number of pregnancies, age at first birth, menopausal status, use of hormone replacement therapy and smoking.

Finally, a study of 788,789 Koreans that took into account age, body mass index, female reproductive factors, and behavioral and socioeconomic factors found that every two inch increment in height was associated with a 5% higher cancer risk for men and 7% for women at all cancer sites.

How height increases cancer risk

The evidence for the height/cancer link is convincing, but the reason for the connection is not known.

Dr. Jane Green from Oxford University, who was lead researcher in the Million Women Study, said, “Obviously height itself cannot affect cancer, but it may be a marker for something else.”

What is that something else? Nobody knows for sure, but various ideas have been put forward.

These include:

• Genetics – 80% of height variation in Western societies is thought to be accounted for by 180 separate genetic markers that could also increase cancer risk.
• Organ mass and skin surface area – the organs and skin surface area of taller people are greater in size. More body cells may make for a greater likelihood of mutation.
• Infections – some pathogens are known to cause cancer. A lower infection load in early childhood could increase risk of cancer if the infections are experienced later in childhood or as adults. Fewer infections in childhood may also lead to underdevelopment of the immune system.
• Birth weight – risks of prostate and breast cancer have been linked to higher birth weight, which in turn is associated with greater height.
• Nutrition – higher calorie intake in childhood and adolescence or greater intake of milk proteins
• Growth hormones – insulin-like growth factor (IGF-1) plays a fundamental role in body growth. Levels of IGF-1 increase in puberty and drive skeletal growth. An excess of this hormone and/or a decrease in its main binding protein, IGF-3, has been strongly linked to many different cancers. Cow’s milk contains high levels of IGF-1.

In a recent paper published in the journal Lancet, four medical professors wrote that for every 2½ inches in height, cancer mortality increases by 4%. They believe this is caused by too much high calorie food, in particular milk, dairy and other animal protein during fetal and child development and its influence on IGF-1.

In their view, “Limiting over-nutrition during pregnancy, early childhood and puberty would avoid not only obesity but also accelerated growth in children – and thus might reduce risk of cancer in adulthood.”

If you are especially tall, there is some good news. You have a lower risk for cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes.

http://www.cancerdefeated.com/milk-it-doesnt-do-a-body-good/3703/

How Sugar Harms Your Brain Health and Drives Alzheimer’s Epidemic

July 24, 2014 

Story at-a-glance

• One in nine seniors over the age of 65 has Alzheimer’s, and the disease is now thought to be the third leading cause of death in the US, right behind heart disease and cancer
• A growing body of research suggests there’s a powerful connection between your diet and your risk of developing Alzheimer's disease, via similar pathways that cause type 2 diabetes
• Recent research shows that sugar and other carbohydrates can disrupt your brain function even if you’re not diabetic or have any signs of dementia
• Long-term, sugar can contribute to the shrinking of your hippocampus, which is a hallmark symptom of Alzheimer's disease
• The researchers propose that lowering glucose levels, even if they’re within the “normal” range, may have a positive influence on cognition in older people

By Dr. Mercola

Alzheimer's disease, a severe form of dementia, affects an estimated 5.2 million Americans, according to 2013 statistics.1

One in nine seniors over the age of 65 has Alzheimer's, and the disease is now thought to be the third leading cause of death in the US, right behind heart disease and cancer.

A growing body of research suggests there's a powerful connection between your diet and your risk of developing Alzheimer's disease, via similar pathways that cause type 2 diabetes.

Contrary to popular belief, your brain does not require glucose, and actually functions better burning alternative fuels, especially ketones, which your body makes in response to digesting healthy fats.

According to some experts, such as Dr. Ron Rosedale, Alzheimer's and other brain disorders may in large part be caused by the constant burning of glucose for fuel by your brain.

Alzheimer's disease was tentatively dubbed "type 3 diabetes" in early 2005 when researchers discovered that in addition to your pancreas, your brain alsoproduces insulin, and this brain insulin is necessary for the survival of brain cells.

Sugar Damages Brain Structure and Function

In your brain, insulin helps with neuron glucose-uptake and the regulation of neurotransmitters, such as acetylcholine, which are crucial for memory and learning. This is why reducing the level of insulin in your brain impairs your cognition.

Research2 has also shown that type 2 diabetics lose more brain volume with age than expected—particularly gray matter. This kind of brain atrophy is yet another contributing factor for dementia.

Studies have found that people with lower levels of insulin and insulin receptors in their brain often have Alzheimer's disease. But according to recent research published in the journal Neurology,3 sugar and other carbohydrates can disrupt your brain function even if you're not diabetic or have any signs of dementia.

To test their theory, they evaluated short- and long-term glucose markers in 141 healthy, non-diabetic, non-demented seniors. Memory tests and brain imaging were administered to assess their brain function and the actual structure of their hippocampus. As reported by Scientific American:4

"Higher levels on both glucose measures were associated with worse memory, as well as a smaller hippocampus and compromised hippocampal structure.

The researchers also found that the structural changes partially accounted for the statistical link between glucose and memory. According to study co-author Agnes Flöel, a neurologist at Charité, the results 'provide further evidence that glucose might directly contribute to hippocampal atrophy.'"

The findings suggest that even if you're not diabetic or insulin resistant (and about 80 percent of Americans fall into the latter category), sugar consumption can still disrupt your memory.

Long-term, it can contribute to the shrinking of your hippocampus, which is a hallmark symptom of Alzheimer's disease. (Your hippocampus is involved with the formation, organization, and storage of memories.)

The authors of the study suggest that "strategies aimed at lowering glucose levels even in the normal range may beneficially influence cognition in the older population."

'Normal' Blood Sugar Levels May Still Be High Enough to Cause Problems

Normally, a fasting blood sugar level between 100-125 mg/dl is diagnosed as a pre-diabetic state. A fasting blood sugar level of 90-100 is considered "normal." But in addition to the featured research, other studies have also found that brain atrophy occurs even in this "normal" blood sugar range.

Neurologist Dr. David Perlmutter, MD insists that being very strict in limiting your consumption of sugar and non-vegetable carbs is one of THE most important steps you can take to prevent Alzheimer's disease for this very reason.

He cites research from the Mayo Clinic, which found that diets rich in carbohydrates are associated with an 89 percent increased risk for dementia. Meanwhile, high-fat diets are associated with a 44 percent reduced risk

Sugar Lobby Threatens Organizations and Buries Science on Health Effects

Compelling research shows that your brain has great plasticity, which you control through your diet and lifestyle choices. Unfortunately, the American public has been grossly brainwashed by the sugar and processed food industries into believing that sugar is a perfectly reasonable "nutrient" that belongs in a healthy diet.  

Without accurate information, it's certainly more difficult to make health-affirming choices. Newsweek5 recently ran an article revealing just how far the sugar industry will go to defend its market share:

"According to a new report6 from the Center for Science and Democracy... industry groups representing companies that sell sweeteners, like the Sugar Association and the Corn Refiners Association... have poured millions of dollars into countering science that indicates negative health consequences of eating their products.

For example, when a University of Southern California study from 2013 found that the actual high fructose corn syrup content in sodas 'varied significantly' from the sugar content disclosed on soda labels, the Corn Refiners Association considered paying for its own counter research.

A consultant suggested that the counter research should only be published if the results aligned with their goal of disputing the USC study: 'If for any reason the results confirm [the University of Southern California study], we can just bury the data,' the consultant wrote, according to the report."

According to the Center for Science report, the Sugar Association even threatened the director general of the World Health Organization (WHO). WHO had published a paper on sugar, recommending a 10 percent limit on added sugars, stating that added sugars "threaten the nutritional quality of diets."

The Sugar Association shot off a letter to the director general, warning him that, unless WHO withdrew the study, the Sugar Association would persuade the US Congress to withdraw the WHO's federal funding. The following year, when WHO published its global health strategy on diet and health, there was no mention of the offending sugar study.

The Sugar Lobby Deserves Blame for Fueling Chronic Disease Epidemics

Indeed, despite overwhelming evidence showing that sugar, and processed fructose in particular, is at the heart of our burgeoning obesity and chronic disease epidemics, the sugar lobby has been so successful in its efforts to thwart the impact of such evidence that there's stillno consensus among our regulatory agencies as to the "factual" dangers of sugar...

According to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data,7 13 percent of the average American's diet is sugar. In the UK, a recently published report8 by the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN) recommends limiting your added sugar intake to five percent, in order to avoid obesity and type 2 diabetes. They calculate this to be the equivalent of 25 grams of sugar (5-6 teaspoons) per day for women, and 35 grams (7-8 teaspoons) for men.

This matches my own recommendations for healthy, non-insulin resistant individuals—with one key difference. I recommend restricting sugar/fructose consumption to 25 grams from ALL sources, not just added sugar. This includes limiting your non-vegetable carbohydrates as well. Crazy enough, the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition still recommends you get 50 percent of your daily energy intake in the form of starchy carbohydrates, which will undoubtedly and significantly raise your risk of insulin resistance. If you're insulin/leptin resistant, diabetic, overweight, or have high blood pressure, heart disease, or cancer, I recommend restricting your sugar/fructose consumption to a maximum of 15 grams per day from all sources, until your insulin/leptin resistance has been resolved.

Dietary Guidelines for Maintaining Healthy Brain Function and Avoiding Alzheimer's Disease

It's becoming increasingly clear that the same pathological process that leads to insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes may also hold true for your brain. As you over-indulge on sugar and grains, your brain becomes overwhelmed by the consistently high levels of glucose and insulin that blunts its insulin signaling, leading to impairments in your thinking and memory abilities, eventually causing permanent brain damage.

Additionally, when your liver is busy processing fructose (which your liver turns into fat), it severely hampers its ability to make cholesterol, an essential building block of your brain that is crucial for optimal brain function. Indeed, mounting evidence supports the notion that significantly reducing fructose consumption is a very important step for preventing Alzheimer's disease. 

Because of the very limited treatments, and no available cure as of yet, you're really left with just one solid solution, and that is to prevent Alzheimer's from happening to you in the first place. As explained by neurologist Dr. David Perlmutter, Alzheimer's is a disease predicated primarily on lifestyle choices; the two main culprits being excessive sugar and gluten consumption.

Another major factor is the development and increased consumption of genetically engineered (GE) grains, which are now pervasive in most processed foods sold in the US. The beauty of following my optimized nutrition plan is that it helps prevent and treat virtually ALL chronic degenerative diseases, including Alzheimer's. Dr. Perlmutter's book, Grain Brain, also provides powerful arguments for eliminating grains from your diet, particularly if you want to protect the health of your brain. In terms of your diet, the following suggestions may be among the most important for Alzheimer's prevention:

• Avoid sugar and refined fructose. Ideally, you'll want to keep your total sugar and fructose below 25 grams per day, or as low as 15 grams per day if you have insulin resistance or any related disorders. In one recent animal study, a junk food diet high in sugar resulted in impaired memory after just one week!9 Place recognition, specifically, was adversely affected.
As a general rule, you'll want to keep your fasting insulin levels below 3, and this is indirectly related to fructose, as it will clearly lead to insulin resistance. However, other sugars (sucrose is 50 percent fructose by weight), grains, and lack of exercise are also important factors. Lowering insulin will also help lower leptin levels which is another factor for Alzheimer's.
• Avoid gluten and casein (primarily wheat and pasteurized dairy, but not dairy fat, such as butter). Research shows that your blood-brain barrier, the barrier that keeps things out of your brain where they don't belong, is negatively affected by gluten. Gluten also makes your gut more permeable, which allows proteins to get into your bloodstream, where they don't belong. That then sensitizes your immune system and promotes inflammation and autoimmunity, both of which play a role in the development of Alzheimer's.
• Eat a nutritious diet, rich in folate, such as the one described in my nutrition plan. Vegetables, without question, are your best form of folate, and we should all eat plenty of fresh raw veggies every day. Avoid supplements like folic acid, which is the inferior synthetic version of folate.
• Increase consumption of all healthful fats, including animal-based omega-3. Beneficial health-promoting fats that your brain needs for optimal function include organic butter from raw milk, clarified butter called ghee, organic grass fed raw butter, olives, organic virgin olive oil and coconut oil, nuts like pecans and macadamia, free-range eggs, wild Alaskan salmon, and avocado.
Contrary to popular belief, the ideal fuel for your brain is not glucose but ketones. Ketones are what your body produces when it converts fat (as opposed to glucose) into energy. The medium-chain triglycerides (MCTs) found in coconut oil are a great source of ketone bodies, because coconut oil is about 66 percent MCTs. In 2010, I published Dr. Mary Newport's theory that coconut oil might offer profound benefits in the fight against Alzheimer's disease. She has sincelaunched one of the first clinical trials of its kind to test this theory.
Also make sure you're getting enough animal-based omega-3 fats, such as krill oil. (I recommend avoiding most fish because, although fish is naturally high in omega-3, most fish are now severely contaminated with mercury.) High intake of the omega-3 fats EPA and DHA help by preventing cell damage caused by Alzheimer's disease, thereby slowing down its progression, and lowering your risk of developing the disorder.
• Optimize your gut flora by regularly eating fermented foods or taking a high-potency and high-quality probiotic supplement
• Eat blueberries. Wild blueberries, which have high anthocyanin and antioxidant content, are known to guard against Alzheimer's and other neurological diseases. 

Other Helpful Dietary Tips and Valuable Supplements

Another helpful tip is to reduce your overall calorie consumption, and/or intermittently fast. As mentioned above, ketones are mobilized when you replace carbs with coconut oil and other sources of healthy fats. A one-day fast can help your body to "reset" itself, and start to burn fat instead of sugar. As part of a healthy lifestyle, I prefer an intermittent fasting schedule that simply calls for limiting your eating to a narrower window of time each day. By restricting your eating to a 6-8 hour window, you effectively fast 16-18 hours each day. To learn more about intermittent fasting, please see this previous article.

Also be aware that when it comes to cholesterol levels and Alzheimer's, lower is NOT better. Quite the contrary. According toDr. Perlmutter, research shows that elderly individuals with the lowest cholesterol levels have the highest risk for Alzheimer's. They also have the highest risk for dying. As he says, the war on cholesterol is fundamentally inappropriate and harmful.

Finally, there's a short list of supplement recommendations worth noting for their specific benefits in preventing and treating dementia. So, although your fundamental strategy for preventing dementia should involve a comprehensive lifestyle approach, you may want to take special note of the following natural dietary agents. These four natural foods/supplements have good science behind them, in terms of preventing age-related cognitive changes:

1. Gingko biloba: Many scientific studies have found that Ginkgo biloba has positive effects for dementia. A 1997 study from JAMA showed clear evidence that Ginkgo improves cognitive performance and social functioning for those suffering from dementia. Another 2006 study found Ginkgo as effective as the dementia drug Aricept (donepezil) for treating mild to moderate Alzheimer's type dementia. A 2010 meta-analysis also found Ginkgo biloba to be effective for a variety of types of dementia.
2. Alpha lipoic acid (ALA): ALA has been shown to help stabilize cognitive functions among Alzheimer's patients and may slow the progression of the disease.
3. Vitamin B12: A small Finnish study published in the journal Neurology10 found thatpeople who consume foods rich in B12 may reduce their risk of Alzheimer's in their later years. For each unit increase in the marker of vitamin B12 the risk of developing Alzheimer's was reduced by two percent. Remember sublingual methylcobalamin may be your best bet here.

Lifestyle Strategies That Can Help Ward off Alzheimer's Disease

Lifestyle choices such as getting regular sun exposure and exercise, along with avoiding toxins, are also important factors when it comes to maintaining optimal brain health. Here are several of my lifestyle suggestions:

• Optimize your vitamin D levels with safe sun exposure. Strong links between low levels of vitamin D in Alzheimer's patients and poor outcomes on cognitive tests have been revealed. Researchers believe that optimal vitamin D levels may enhance the amount of important chemicals in your brain and protect brain cells by increasing the effectiveness of the glial cells in nursing damaged neurons back to health.
Vitamin D may also exert some of its beneficial effects on Alzheimer's through its anti-inflammatory and immune-boosting properties. Sufficient vitamin D is imperative for proper functioning of your immune system to combat inflammation that is also associated with Alzheimer's.
• Exercise regularly. It's been suggested that exercise can trigger a change in the way the amyloid precursor protein is metabolized,11 thus, slowing down the onset and progression of Alzheimer's. Exercise also increases levels of the protein PGC-1alpha. Research has also shown that people with Alzheimer's have less PGC-1alpha in their brains12 and cells that contain more of the protein produce less of the toxic amyloid protein associated with Alzheimer's. I would strongly recommend reviewing the Peak Fitness Technique for my specific recommendations.
• Avoid and eliminate mercury from your body. Dental amalgam fillings, which are 50 percent mercury by weight, are one of the major sources of heavy metal toxicity. However, you should be healthy prior to having them removed. Once you have adjusted to following the diet described in my optimized nutrition plan, you can follow the mercury detox protocol and then find a biological dentist to have your amalgams removed.
• Avoid aluminum, such as antiperspirants, non-stick cookware, vaccine adjuvants, etc.
• Avoid flu vaccinations as most contain both mercury and aluminum, well-known neurotoxic and immunotoxic agents.
• Avoid anticholinergics and statin drugs. Drugs that block acetylcholine, a nervous system neurotransmitter, have been shown to increase your risk of dementia. These drugs include certain nighttime pain relievers, antihistamines, sleep aids, certain antidepressants, medications to control incontinence, and certain narcotic pain relievers.
Statin drugs are particularly problematic because they suppress the synthesis of cholesterol, deplete your brain of coenzyme Q10 and neurotransmitter precursors, and prevent adequate delivery of essential fatty acids and fat-soluble antioxidants to your brain by inhibiting the production of the indispensable carrier biomolecule known as low-density lipoprotein.
• Challenge your mind daily. Mental stimulation, especially learning something new, such as learning to play an instrument or a new language, is associated with a decreased risk of Alzheimer's. Researchers suspect that mental challenge helps to build up your brain, making it less susceptible to the lesions associated with Alzheimer's disease.

[+] Sources and References

Go to Healthwise for more articles

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2014/07/24/sugar-brain-function.aspx?