Reinventing the Fountain of Youth
Anti-aging
Supplements: The Real Story Natural or Synthetic? Foods or Tablets?
15 hours
It’s a nutritional “Catch 22″: The public is told, confusingly: “Vitamins are good, but vitamin supplements are not. Only vitamins from food will help you. So just eat a good diet. Do not take supplements! But by the way, there is no difference between natural and synthetic vitamins.”
Wait a minute. What’s the real story here?
A recent health study reported that the risk of heart failure decreased with increasing blood levels of vitamin C [1]. The benefit of vitamin C (ascorbate) was highly significant. Persons with the lowest plasma levels of ascorbate had the highest risk of heart failure, and persons with the highest levels of vitamin C had the lowest risk of heart failure. This finding confirms the knowledge derived over the last 50 years that vitamin C is a major essential factor in cardiovascular health [2,3]. The study raises several important questions about diet and vitamin supplements.
Was it Food or Supplements?
The report discussed vitamin C as if it were simply an indicator of how many fruits and vegetables were consumed by the participants. Yet, ironically, the study’s results show little improvement in the risk for heart failure from consuming fruits and vegetables. This implies that the real factor in reducing the risk was indeed the amount of vitamin C consumed. Moreover, the study appears to utterly ignore the widespread use of vitamin C supplements to improve cardiovascular health. In fact, out of four quartile groups, the quartile with the highest plasma vitamin C had six to ten times the rate of vitamin C supplementation of the lowest quartile, but this fact was not emphasized. This type of selective attention to food sources of vitamin C, while dismissing supplements as an important source, appears to be an attempt to marginalize the importance of vitamin supplements.
Many medical and nutritional reports have maintained that there is little difference between natural and synthetic vitamins. This is known to be true for some essential nutrients. The ascorbate found in widely available vitamin C tablets is identical to the ascorbate found in fruits and vegetables [3]. Linus Pauling emphasized this fact, and explained how ordinary vitamin C, inexpensively manufactured from glucose, could improve health in many important ways [4]. Indeed, the above-mentioned study specifically measured the plasma level of ascorbate, which was shown to be an important factor associated with lower risk of heart failure [1, 2]. The study did not measure blood plasma levels of the components of fruits and vegetables. It measured vitamin C.
A known rationale for this dramatic finding is that vitamin C helps to prevent inflammation in the arteries by several mechanisms. It is a necessary co-factor for the synthesis of collagen, which is a major component of arteries. Vitamin C is also an important antioxidant throughout the body that can help to recycle other antioxidants like vitamin E and glutathione in the artery walls [2,3]. This was underscored by a report that high plasma levels of vitamin C are associated with a 50% reduction in risk for stroke [5].
Yes, Synthetic Vitamin C is Clinically Effective
We can almost hear “Unsubscribe” links being clicked as we state it, but here it is: synthetic vitamin C works, in real people with real illnesses. Ascorbate’s efficacy has little direct relation to food intake. A dramatic case of this was a dairy farmer in New Zealand who was on life support with lung whiteout, kidney failure, leukemia and swine flu [6]. He was given 100,000 mg of vitamin C daily and his life was saved. We have nothing against oranges or other vitamin C-containing foods. Fruits and vegetables are good for you for many, many reasons. However, you’ll need to get out your calculator to help you figure out how many oranges it would take to get that much, and then also figure how to get a sick person to eat them all.
It is established that liver function improves with vitamin C supplementation, and it is equally well known that adequate levels of vitamin C are essential for the proper functioning of the immune system. Vitamin C improves the ability of the white blood cells to fight bacteria and viruses. OMNS has more articles expanding on this topic, available for free access at http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/index.shtml .
Deficiency of vitamin C is very common. According to US Department of Agriculture (USDA) data, [7] nearly half of Americans do not get even the US RDA of vitamin C, which is a mere 90 mg.
Synthetic Vitamin E is Less Effective
For some other nutrients, there is a significant difference in efficacy between synthetic and natural forms. Vitamin E is a crucial anti-oxidant, but also has other functions in the body, not all well understood. It comprises eight different biochemical forms, alpha-, beta-, delta- and gamma tocopherols, and alpha-, beta-, delta-, and gamma-tocotrienols. All of these forms of vitamin E are important for the body. Current knowledge about the function of vitamin E is rapidly expanding, and each of the eight forms of natural vitamin E is thought to have a slightly different function in the body. For example, gamma-tocotrienol actually kills prostate cancer stem cells better than chemotherapy does. ( http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v07n11.shtml )
Synthetic vitamin E is widely available and inexpensive. It is “DL-alpha-tocopherol.” Yes, it has the same antioxidant properties in test tube experiments as does the natural “D-alpha-tocopherol” form. However, the DL- form has only 50% of the biological efficacy, because the body utilizes only the natural D isomer, which comprises half of the synthetic mix [8]. Therefore, studies utilizing DL-alpha-tocopherol that do not take this fact into account are starting with an already-halved dose that will naturally lead to a reduction in the observed efficacy.
Then there are the esterified forms of vitamin E such as acetate or succinate. These esterified forms, either natural or synthetic, have a greater shelf life because the ester protects the vitamin E from being oxidized and neutralized. When acid in the stomach cleaves the acetate or succinate component from the original natural vitamin E molecule, the gut can then absorb a good fraction and the body receives its antioxidant benefit. But when esterified vitamin E acetate is applied to the skin to prevent inflammation, it is ineffective because there is no acid present to remove the acetate ester.
Based on USDA data [9] an astonishing 90% of Americans do not get the RDA of vitamin E, which is, believe it or not, under 23 IU (15mg) per day.
Magnesium Deficiency is Widespread
Magnesium is another example. Over two-thirds of the population do not get the RDA of magnesium.[10] Deficiency can cause a wide variety of symptoms, including osteoporosis, high blood pressure, heart disease, asthma, depression, and diabetes. Magnesium can be purchased in many forms. The most widely available form is magnesium oxide, which is not very effective because it is only about 5% absorbed [11]. Magnesium oxide supplements are popular because the pills are smaller — they contain more magnesium, but won’t help most people. Better forms of magnesium are magnesium citrate, magnesium malate, and the best absorbed is magnesium chloride. It’s always good to consult your doctor to determine your ideal intake. Testing may reveal unexpected deficiency. [12]
Well, Which? Natural or Synthetic?
While the natural form of vitamin E (mixed natural tocopherols and tocotrienols) is at least twice as effective as the synthetic form, this is not true of vitamin C. The ascorbate that the body gets from fruits and vegetables is the same as the ascorbate in vitamin C tablets. On first thought, this may sound confusing, because there are many so-called “natural” forms of vitamin C widely available. But virtually every study that demonstrated that supplemental vitamin C fights illness used plain, cheap, synthetic ascorbic acid. Other forms of ascorbate, for instance, the sodium or magnesium salt of ascorbic acid, are digested slightly differently by the gut, but once the ascorbate molecule is absorbed from these forms, it has identical efficacy. The advantage of these ascorbate salts is that they are non-acidic and can be ingested or topically applied to any part of the body without concern about irritation from acidity.
Further, it is known that essential nutrients are symbiotic, that is, they are more effective when taken as a group in proper doses. For example, vitamin E is more effective when taken along with vitamin C and selenium, because each of these essential nutrients can improve the efficacy of the others. Similarly, the B vitamins are more effective when taken together. Readers with dosage questions will want to consult their healthcare provider, and also look at freely available information archived at http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/index.shtml .
Food Factors
Natural food factors are also important. Bioflavonoids and other vitamin C-friendly components in fresh fruits and vegetables (sometimes called “vitamin C complex”) do indeed have health benefits. These natural components are easily obtained from a healthy, unprocessed whole foods diet. However, eating even a very good diet does not supply nearly enough vitamin C to be effective against illness. A really good diet might provide several hundred milligrams of vitamin C daily. An extreme raw food diet might provide two or three thousand milligrams of vitamin C, but this is not practical for most people. Supplementation, with a good diet, is.
The principle that “natural” vitamins are better than synthetic vitamins is a widely quoted justification for actually avoiding vitamin supplements. The argument goes, because vitamins and minerals are available from food in their natural form, that somehow one might suppose that we are best off by ignoring supplements. Apparently this is what the authors of the above-mentioned study had in mind, because the report hardly mentions vitamin supplements.
Conclusion
In the real world of today’s processed food, most of us don’t get all the nutrients we need in adequate doses. Most people are deficient in several of the essential nutrients. These deficiencies are responsible for much suffering, including heart disease, cancer, premature aging, dementia, diabetes, and other diseases such as eye disease, multiple sclerosis and asthma. The above-mentioned study showing the efficacy of vitamin C in reducing heart failure is but one of the many studies showing the value of vitamins. Others are discussed and available at http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/index.shtml .
For vitamin E, the natural form, taken in adequate doses along with a nutritious diet, is the best medicine. However, for most vitamins, including vitamin C, the manufactured form is identical to the natural one. Both are biologically active and both work clinically. It all comes down to dose. Supplements enable optimum intake; foods alone do not.
Don’t be fooled: nutrient deficiency is the rule, not the exception. That’s why we need supplements. When ill, we need them even more.
References:
1. Pfister R, Sharp SJ, Luben R, Wareham NJ, Khaw KT. (2011) Plasma vitamin C predicts incident heart failure in men and women in European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition-Norfolk prospective study. Am Heart J. 162:246-253. See also: http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v07n14.shtml
2. Levy TE (2006) Stop America’s #1 Killer: Reversible Vitamin Deficiency Found to be Origin of All Coronary Heart Disease. ISBN-13: 9780977952007
3. Hickey S, Saul AW (2008) Vitamin C: The Real Story, the Remarkable and Controversial Healing Factor. Basic Health Publications, ISBN-13: 978-1591202233.
4. Pauling L. (2006) How to Live Longer And Feel Better. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. ISBN-13: 9780870710964.
5. Kurl S, Tuomainen TP, Laukkanen JA, Nyyssönen K, Lakka T, Sivenius J, Salonen JT. (2002) Plasma vitamin C modifies the association between hypertension and risk of stroke. Stroke. 33:1568-1573.
6. Watch the Channel 3 New Zealand news report at http://www.3news.co.nz/Living-Proof-Vitamin-C—Miracle-Cure/tabid/371/articleID/171328/Default.aspx or http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xh70sx_60-minutes-scoop-on-new-zealand-farmer-vit-c-miracle_tech [ Note that each video is proceeded by a commercial, over which we have no control, and with which we have no financial connection whatsoever. ]
7. Free, full text paper at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1405127/pdf/amjph00225-0021.pdf
8. Papas A. (1999) The Vitamin E Factor: The miraculous antioxidant for the prevention and treatment of heart disease, cancer, and aging. HarperCollins, NY. ISBN-13: 9780060984434
9. http://lpi.oregonstate.edu/infocenter/vitamins/vitaminE/ ; scroll down to “Deficiency.”
10. Free, full text paper at http://www.jacn.org/content/24/3/166.full.pdf+html (or http://www.jacn.org/content/24/3/166.long )
11. Dean, C. (2007) The Magnesium Miracle. Ballantine Books, ISBN-13: 9780345494580
12. http://www.doctoryourself.com/epilepsy.html
Nutritional Medicine is Orthomolecular Medicine
Orthomolecular medicine uses safe, effective nutritional therapy to fight illness. For more information: http://www.orthomolecular.org
Share and Enjoy
Bioidentical Hormones, Waking Up From the Synthetic Hormone Nightmare
131286 days
Shirley is 52, and suffering from menopausal symptoms of hot flashes, night sweats, insomnia and mood disturbance. The next chance she had, Shirley asked her doctor for bioidentical hormones. Instead, her doctor offered her a prescription for Lexapro, an SSRI antidepressant. Shirley declined the prescription and ran out the door crying all the way home. A few days later, Shirley was sitting in my office asking, “Why won’t my doctor give me what I want, bioidentical hormones?”
Ghost Writing – A Shocking Medical Scandal
I explained to Shirley that her doctor’s opinion is shaped by misleading information in medical journals corrupted by a technique called medical ghostwriting, a shocking scandal uncovered by Senator Grassley’s Committee.(1) In this sinister practice, the prestigious name of an academic MD “opinion leader” appears as author. However, unknown to the reader, the article is actually written by the drug company’s paid-for-hire writers. Grassley discovered that sixty articles on women’s hormones were ghostwritten, downplaying the adverse effects of synthetic hormones, and casting doubts about bioidentical hormones. Medical ghostwriting is scientific misconduct and fraud which harms society and corrupts the medical literature.
A Brief History of Synthetic Hormones – Re-Living the Nightmare
Let’s review a short history of synthetic hormone replacement as brought to you by the Drug Industry. (2) Many people have forgotten about the disaster of DES, Diethylstilbestrol, the first synthetic hormone invented in 1938. This carcinogenic, monster hormone was approved by the FDA and given to millions of women from 1940 until it was banned in 1975 when it was shown carcinogenic. The first report of cervical cancer in the daughters of DES treated women was published in April 1971 in the New England Journal of Medicine.(3-4)
Next, the Drug Industry invented Premarin, a horse estrogen isolated from the urine of pregnant horses. Available since FDA approval in 1942, Premarin has caused an estimated 15,000 cases of endometrial cancer, representing the largest epidemic of serious iatrogenic disease ever reported.(5-8) One might think this would be the end of any drug. However Premarin was promptly rehabilitated with the addition of another synthetic hormone, a progestin, to prevent endometrial cancer. Thus, in 1995, Prempro was born, a synthetic hormone pill containing both Premarin (the horse estrogen) and Provera (the progestin). Again, this was FDA approved, thought safe and handed out freely to millions of women.
However, storm clouds soon appeared on the horizon when four large scale studies showed increased breast cancer and heart disease from this estrogen-progestin combination pill. The Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project, published in 2000, showed an eight fold increase in breast cancer for estrogen-progestin users.(9) The Swedish Record Review, published in 1996, had a fourfold increase in breast cancer with progestin use.(10) The Million Woman study, published in Lancet in 2003, had a fourfold increase in breast cancer for estrogen-progestin combination users compared to estrogen alone users.(11) The brakes came on to this synthetic hormone experiment in 2002 with the JAMA publication of the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI), an NIH funded study terminated early because of increased breast cancer and heart disease in the estrogen-progestin users.(12)
Abandoning the Synthetic Hormone Ship
Two important things happened after this 2002 WHI study was published. Smart women abandoned synthetic hormones and switched in large number to bioidentical hormones, producing an immediate decline in breast cancer rates of about nine per cent.(13,14) A second important thing happened. Apparently, women have decided to turn to lawyers to protect them, since the FDA has been unable to do so. Thirteen thousand women have filed cases in court claiming synthetic hormones caused their breast cancer. These cases are slowly working their way through the court system, and the jury is still out, so stay tuned.(15)
Dispelling the Myths and Misconceptions
Over the years, I have compiled a list of myths and misinformation commonly encountered about bioidentical hormones in newspapers and magazines. Here are a few of them, followed by the corrections. The misinformation is in italics, with the correct information to follow.
Myth Number One: “The term bioidentical hormone is undefined and has no meaning.”
This is incorrect. Bioidentical is a term which is defined as having the exact same chemical structure as hormones found naturally in the human body. Bioidentical Hormones are the ones circulating in your blood stream right now.
Myth Number Two: “There is no proof that Bioidentical Hormones are safer and more effective than synthetic hormones…All of the evidence that we have suggests that all of these hormones should be painted with the same brush,”
This is incorrect and misleading. As we have seen in the above short history of synthetic hormones, there exists a large body of science showing that synthetic chemically altered hormones cause cancer and heart disease.(9-14) On the other hand, medical studies have found bioidentical hormones are safe with no increase in breast cancer or heart disease compared to non-hormone users. (33-41) An excellent review of this medical science can be found in a 2009 article by Kent Holtorf MD in Postgraduate Medicine. (16)
Myth Number Three: “Bioidentical Hormones are not FDA approved.”
This is blatantly incorrect. There are twenty or so FDA approved bioidentical hormone preparations widely available at corner drug stores. Here are a few examples: Vivelle-Dot, Estrace, Climara, Prometrium, Androgel , etc.
Myth Number Four: “Bioidentical Hormones made by compounding pharmacies are Non-FDA approved.”
This is not only incorrect, it is misleading and deceptive. Compounding pharmacies are regulated at the state level, and do not fall under FDA jurisdiction. So, of course compounding is not FDA approved. No FDA approval is required or even desired. Your local hospital pharmacy is a compounding pharmacy that makes up life saving medication such as IV antibiotics with no FDA oversight or “approval”. The FDA approval process is designed for manufactured capsules and tablets, and is impractical and unnecessary for compounded medications prepared to order by hand. Are we going to reject IV antibiotics from the hospital pharmacy because these are non-FDA approved compounded medication? Of course not. Compounding is here to stay.
Myth Number Five: “Unless a woman has symptoms of hot flashes and night sweats, she doesn’t need hormones.”
This is incorrect. In addition to night sweats and hot flashes, there are many other valid symptoms of hormone deficiency such as insomnia, cognitive dysfunction, menopausal arthritis, evaporative dry eye, anxiety, panic, mood disorder, vaginal dryness, and decreased libido and post hysterectomy. These are all good indications for prescribing bioidentical hormones. (17-25)
Myth Number Six: “The idea that Menopause is a Hormone Deficiency Disease was disproven, and the idea that hormone replacement rejuvenates youth, or prevents degenerative diseases is also disproven….Hormones decline with age, and is normal and does not require treatment.”
This is incorrect. There is no question that hormonal decline is a health risk. Three separate studies have shown low testosterone in males carries a 40% increase in mortality.(26-28) Studies in females show the same findings, with low hormone levels in women after hysterectomy associated with increased mortality. (29)(30) Hormonal decline is a direct cause of degenerative diseases of aging, all of which may be prevented or partially reversed by replenishing hormone levels, a vastly more effective treatment which competes directly with the Drug Industry.(42-46)
Myth Number Seven: “Hot flashes and sweats in menopausal women can be treated with SSRI antidepressants. They don’t need to use hormones.”
This is not only wrong, it is criminal. The use of SSRI antidepressants for menopausal symptoms is NOT FDA approved, and is a cruel mistreatment and medical victimization of women. This practice should be halted immediately. Studies of SSRI drugs show they are no better than placebo for most cases of depression(31), and they are not much better than placebo for menopausal hot flashes. (32) Synthetic hormones are bad enough, they cause cancer and heart disease. SSRI drugs like Lexepro, Effexor and Pristiq are even worse; they are chemically addictive with horrendous withdrawal effects. Avoid becoming a medical victim. Stay away.
In Conclusion:
It is time to awaken from the nightmare of synthetic hormones, known for decades to cause cancer and heart disease. You can put lipstick on a pig, and it is still a pig. The drug industry can spin, deceive, and misleading the medical journals and media. Yet, after all the lies and propaganda, synthetic hormones remain monsters that should be avoided. Smart women have made the switch to safer and more effective bioidentical hormones. The future of medicine is your choice to make. Hopefully, this article has awakened you to the natural choice.
For More Information, here are some leaders in the field of bioidentical hormones providing trustworthy information in books, articles and web sites: David Brownstein MD, Kenton Bruice MD, John Crisler DO, Kent Holtorf MD, Steve Hotze MD, Sangeeta Pati MD, CW Randolph MD, Ron Rothenberg MD, Erika Schwartz MD, Jonathan Wright MD, and Joseph Mc Wherter MD.
Disclaimer: This article is for educational purposes and not intended as medical advice, and it is recommended you work closely with a knowledgeable physician before making any decisions regarding hormone treatment. Please feel free to share this article with your doctor.
Jeffrey Dach MD
7450 Griffin Road, Suite 190
Davie, Florida 33314
(954) 792-4663 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting (954) 792-4663 end_of_the_skype_highlighting
http://www.drdach.com
Author Biography: Jeffrey Dach MD is founder of the TrueMedMD clinic in Davie, Florida specializing in bioidentical hormones and natural thyroid. He is the author of the book, Natural Medicine 101 available on Amazon, and offers a free email newsletter.
References
(1) http://grassley.senate.gov/about/upload/Senator-Grassley-Report.pdf Ghostwriting in Medical Literature Minority Staff Report 111th Congress United States Senate Committee on Finance Sen. Charles E. Grassley, Ranking Member June 24, 2010
(2) http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/13/business/13drug.html Menopause, as Brought to You by Big Pharma By NATASHA SINGER and DUFF WILSON Published: December 12, 2009
(3) http://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJM197104222841604 Adenocarcinoma of the Vagina — Association of Maternal Stilbestrol Therapy with Tumor Appearance in Young Women. Arthur L. Herbst, M.D., Howard Ulfelder, M.D., and David C. Poskanzer, M.D. N Engl J Med 1971; 284:878-881April 22, 1971
(4) http://www.jstor.org/pss/2683841 Epidemiologic Evidence for Adverse Effects of DES Exposure during Pregnancy Theodore Colton and E. Robert Greenberg The American Statistician Vol. 36, No. 3, Part 2: Proceedings of the Sixth Symposium on Statistics and the Environment (Aug., 1982), pp. 268-272
(5) http://ajph.aphapublications.org/cgi/reprint/70/3/264.pdf The Epidemic of Endometrial Cancer:A Commentary Hershel Jick et al.Am J Public Health 70:264-267, 1980.
(6) http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM197512042932303 Increased Risk of Endometrial Carcinoma among Users of Conjugated Estrogens. Harry K. Ziel, M.D., and William D. Finkle, Ph.D. N Engl J Med 1975; 293:1167-1170 December 4, 1975
(7) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/213722 N Engl J Med. 1979 Jan 4;300(1):9-13. Endometrial cancer and estrogen use. Report of a large case-control study. Antunes CM, Strolley PD, Rosenshein NB, Davies JL, Tonascia JA, Brown C, Burnett L, Rutledge A, Pokempner M, Garcia R.
(8) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3358913
The dose-effect relationship between ‘unopposed’ oestrogens and endometrial mitotic rate: its central role in explaining and predicting endometrial cancer risk.Key TJ, Pike MC.
Br J Cancer. 1988 Feb;57(2):205-12.
(9) http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/283/4/485.abstract Menopausal Estrogen and Estrogen-Progestin Replacement Therapy and Breast Cancer Risk. Catherine Schairer, PhD et al. JAMA. 2000;283(4):485-491.
(10) http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0215(19960729)67:3%3C327::AID-IJC4%3E3.0.CO;2-T/pdf
see also http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8707404
Cancer incidence and mortality in women receiving estrogen and estrogen-progestin replacement therapy—long-term follow-up of a Swedish cohort. Ingemar Persson et al. International Journal of Cancer Volume 67, Issue 3, pages 327–332, 29 July 1996
(11) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12927427 Lancet. 2003 Aug 9;362(9382):419-27. Breast cancer and hormone-replacement therapy in the Million Women Study. Beral V; Million Women Study Collaborators.
(12) http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/288/3/321
Risks and Benefits of Estrogen Plus Progestin in Healthy Postmenopausal Women
Principal Results From the Women’s Health Initiative Randomized Controlled Trial
Writing Group for the Women’s Health Initiative Investigators JAMA. 2002;288:321-333.
(13) http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsr070105 The Decrease in Breast-Cancer Incidence in 2003 in the United States. Peter M. Ravdin, Ph.D., M.D et al. N Engl J Med 2007; 356:1670-1674 April 19, 2007. A comparison of incidence rates in 2001 with those in 2004 (omitting the years in which the incidence was changing) showed that the decrease in annual age-adjusted incidence was 8.6% .
(14) http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2010/09/23/jnci.djq345.abstract Breast Cancer Incidence and Hormone Replacement Therapy in Canada by Prithwish De, C. Ineke Neutel, Ivo Olivotto and Howard Morrison. JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst (2010) . This drop occurred concurrently with a 9.6% decline in the incidence rate of breast cancer
(15) http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-27/pfizer-settles-arkansas-prempro-case-before-retrial-over-punitive-damages.html Pfizer Said to Pay $330 Million to Settle Prempro Lawsuits Claiming Cancer By Jef Feeley – Feb 9, 2011 4:42 PM ET
(16)http://jeffreydach.com/files/80618-70584/The_Bioidentical_Hormone_Debate_Ken_Holtorf_MD.pdf
Postgraduate Medicine: Volume 121: No.1 January 2009. The Bioidentical Hormone Debate:Are Bioidentical Hormones (Estradiol, Estriol, and Progesterone) Safer or More Efficacious than Commonly Used Synthetic Versions in Hormone Replacement Therapy? Kent Holtorf, MD
(17) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11386980 Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2001 Jun;58(6):529-34. Efficacy of estradiol for the treatment of depressive disorders in perimenopausal women: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. by Soares CN et al.
(18) http://www.neurology.org/cgi/content/abstract/57/4/605 Neurology 2001;57:605-612, 2001 American Academy of Neurology High-dose estradiol improves cognition for women with AD Results of a randomized study by S. Asthana, MD et al.
(19) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19804793 Estradiol reduces anxiety- and depression-like behavior of aged female mice by Alicia A. Walf and Cheryl A. Frye Neuroscience
(20) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16142740 Arthritis Rheum. 2005 Sep;52(9):2594-8. Aromatase inhibitors and the syndrome of arthralgias with estrogen deprivation. Felson DT, Cummings SR.
(21) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9609575 Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1998 May;178(5):1002-9.When does estrogen replacement therapy improve sleep quality? Polo-Kantola P et al.
(22) http://cme.medscape.com/viewarticle/512093 “Menopausal Arthritis” May Develop in Women Receiving Estrogen-Depleting Treatments News Author: Laurie Barclay, MD CME Author: Désirée Lie, MD, MSEd
(23) http://www.emaxhealth.com/70/3606.html Women treated with aromatase inhibitors often experience joint pain and musculoskeletal aching: severe enough, in some cases, to make them stop the treatment.
(24) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11173183 Maturitas. 2001 Jan 31;37(3):209-12. Treatment of keratoconjunctivitis sicca with topical androgen. by Worda C et al.
(25) http://abstracts.iovs.org/cgi/content/abstract/44/5/2450 Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2003;44: E-Abstract 2450. Treatment of Dry Eye with a Transdermal 3% Testosterone Cream by C.G. Connor.
(26) http://eurheartj.oxfordjournals.org/content/31/12/1494.abstract Eur Heart J (2010) 31 (12): 1494-1501. Low serum testosterone levels are associated with increased risk of mortality in a population-based cohort of men aged 20–79, Robin Haring et al.
(27) http://circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/116/23/2694 Endogenous Testosterone and Mortality Due to All Causes, Cardiovascular Disease, and Cancer in Men European Prospective Investigation Into Cancer in Norfolk (EPIC-Norfolk) Prospective Population Study (Circulation. 2007;116:2694-2701.)
(28) http://archinte.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/166/15/1660 Vol. 166 No. 15, Aug 14/28, 2006 Low Serum Testosterone and Mortality in Male Veterans Molly M. Shores, MD et al. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166:1660-1665.
(29) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2755630 Menopause. 2009 Jan–Feb; 16(1): 15–23. Increased cardiovascular mortality following early bilateral oophorectomy. Cathleen M. Rivera, MD et al.
(30) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19384117 Obstet Gynecol. 2009 May;113(5):1027-37.Ovarian conservation at the time of hysterectomy and long-term health outcomes in the nurses’ health study. Parker WH et al.
(31) http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/303/1/47 Antidepressant Drug Effects and Depression Severity A Patient-Level Meta-analysis. Jay C. Fournier et al. JAMA. 2010;303(1):47-53.
(32) http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/305/3/267 Efficacy of Escitalopram for Hot Flashes in Healthy Menopausal Women A Randomized Controlled Trial Ellen W. Freeman, PhD; JAMA. 2011;305(3):267-274
(33) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15551359 Int J Cancer. 2005 Apr 10;114(3):448-54. Breast cancer risk in relation to different types of hormone replacement therapy in the E3N-EPIC cohort. Fournier A et al.
(34) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2211383/ Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008 January; 107(1): 103–111. Unequal risks for breast cancer associated with different hormone replacement therapies: results from the E3N cohort study. Agnès Fournier et al.
(35) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19752341 J Clin Oncol. 2009 Nov 1;27(31):5138-43. Estrogen-progestagen menopausal hormone therapy and breast cancer: does delay from menopause onset to treatment initiation influence risks? Fournier A et al.
(36) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17651686 Ann Endocrinol (Paris). 2007 Sep;68(4):241-50. Epub 2007 Jul 24. Hormonal replacement therapy (HRT) in postmenopause: a reappraisal. Caufriez A.
(37) http://jeffreydach.com/files/80618-70584/Hormones__in_wellness_and_disease_prevention_common_practices_current_state_evidence_Erika_Schwartz_Kent_Holtorf.pdf
Prim Care. 2008 Dec;35(4):669-705. Hormones in wellness and disease prevention: common practices, current state of the evidence, and questions for the future. Schwartz ET, Holtorf K.
(38) http://www.jpands.org/vol13no2/hotze.pdf Point/Counterpoint:The Case for Bioidentical Hormones by Steven F. Hotze, M.D. Donald P. Ellsworth, M.D. Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons Volume 13 Number 2 Summer 2008 p43.
(39) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18775609 Could transdermal estradiol + progesterone be a safer postmenopausal HRT? A review. L’hermite M, Simoncini T, Fuller S, Genazzani AR. Maturitas. 2008 Jul-Aug;60(3-4):185-201.
(40) http://www.thorne.com/altmedrev/.fulltext/11/3/208.pdf A Comprehensive Review of the Safety and Efficacy of Bioidentical Hormones for the Management of Menopause and Related Health Risks Deborah Moskowitz, ND Altern Med Rev 2006;11(3):208-223
(41) http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123717056802137143.html March 16, 2009 The Truth About Hormone Therapy Wall Street Journal By Erika Schwartz , Kent Holtorf , and David Brownstein
(42) http://www.tasciences.com/pdf/Harley_CMM_final.pdf Current Molecular Medicine 2005, 5, 29-38 205 Telomerase Therapeutics for Degenerative Diseases. By Calvin B. Harley.
(43) http://mcb.asm.org/cgi/content/full/20/11/3764 Molecular and Cellular Biology, June 2000, p. 3764-3771, Vol. 20, No. 11 Induction of hTERT Expression and Telomerase Activity by Estrogens in Human Ovary Epithelium Cells. Silvia Misiti, et al.,
(44) http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/59/23/5917.full Estrogen Activates Telomerase. Satoru Kyo et al. Cancer Res December 1, 1999 59; 5917
(45) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC120798/ Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2002 September; 66(3): 407–425. Human Telomerase and Its Regulation. Yu-Sheng Cong et al.
(46) http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature09603.html Telomerase reactivation reverses tissue degeneration in aged telomerase-deficient mice by Ronald A. DePinho et al. Nature November 2010.
Jeffrey Dach MD
7450 Griffin Road
Davie, Fl 33314
954-983-1443 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 954-983-1443 end_of_the_skype_highlighting
http://www.jeffreydach.com
http://www.drdach.com
http://www.naturalmedicine101.com
http://www.truemedmd.com
Click Here for: Dr Dach’s Online Store for Pure Encapsulations Supplements Click Here for: Dr Dach’s Online Store for Nature’s Sunshine Supplements
Web Site and Discussion Board Links:
http://jdach1.typepad.com/blog/
http://disc.yourwebapps.com/Indices/244124.html
http://disc.yourwebapps.com/Indices/244066.html
http://disc.yourwebapps.com/Indices/244067.html
http://disc.yourwebapps.com/Indices/244161.html
http://disc.yourwebapps.com/Indices/244163.html
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.health.diabetes/browse_frm/thread/ade10a1b80e9725b?hl=en#
Disclaimer click here: http://www.drdach.com/wst_page20.html
The reader is advised to discuss the comments on these pages with his/her personal physicians and to only act upon the advice of his/her personal physician. Also note that concerning an answer which appears as an electronically posted question, I am NOT creating a physician — patient relationship. Although identities will remain confidential as much as possible, as I can not control the media, I can not take responsibility for any breaches of confidentiality that may occur.
Link to this article:
http://jeffreydach.com/2011/03/29/bioidentical-hormones-clearing-up-the-confusion-jeffrey-dach.aspx
Copyright (c) 2010,11 Jeffrey Dach MD All Rights Reserved. This article may be reproduced on the internet without permission, provided there is a link to this page and proper credit is given.
Share and Enjoy
Alzheimer’s may begin in liver
0317 days
A brain plaque caused by deposit of amyloid in the nerve cells of the brain.
The plaques, believed to be characteristic of the debilitating Alzheimer’s disease, starts in the liver rather than in the brain, a new study says.
Amyloid, the main substance in brain plaques associated with Alzheimer’s, originates from the liver, not the brain. The mind robbing disease, thus, can be treated outside the brain, said researchers at the Scripps Research Institute and ModGene, L.L.C.
Greg Sutcliffe and colleagues used a mouse model for Alzheimer’s disease to identify the genes that influence the amount of amyloid accumulated in the brain.
Three genes protect mice from the accumulation and deposition of amyloid in the brain. Lower expression of these genes in the liver prevents the formation of amyloid plaques in the mouse’s brain, the scientists wrote in the Journal of Neuroscience Research.
“We reasoned that if brain amyloid was being born in the liver and transported to the brain by the blood, then that should be the case in all mice and one would predict in humans, too,” said Sutcliffe, adding that blocking the production of beta amyloid in the liver may protect the brain.
Injecting Gleevec, a new drug used for treating leukemia and gastrointestinal tumors, reduces the production of beta amyloid both in the blood and brain of the studied AD mice, the study found.
“This unexpected finding holds promise for the development of new therapies to fight Alzheimer’s,” the lead author said.”This could greatly simplify the challenge of developing therapies and prevention.”
Mar 5, 2011, http://www.presstv.ir/detail/168311.html
Share and Enjoy
Towards age-suppression
1388 days
The amino acid L-cysteine is one of the standard building blocks used by the body to produce the countless proteins it needs: enzymes, structural proteins, signalling molecules and their receptors, and small polypeptide molecules with specialized functions. One such polypeptide, ‘glutathione’, is an essential antioxidant that protects cells from being damaged or killed by stray free radicals.
Since glutathione is crucially important for preventing cellular damage and the diseases that result from such damage, there is good reason to increase the amount of L-cysteine available to the body for making it. The trouble is, if cysteine is used as a supplement, it can be neurotoxic. This toxicity can be avoided by using N-acetylcysteine (NAC) instead of cysteine itself.
NAC’s remarkable biological benefits
NAC is one of the most studied of all supplements. In the 1960s it was found to be useful for people with cystic fibrosis and other pulmonary ailments. It later garnered the attention of HIV researchers, and has now been investigated for many other medical conditions.
The list of medical applications of NAC is a very long one, and includes the following categories:
- Pulmonary and respiratory ailments
- Aging
- Muscle fatigue
- Neurological conditions
- Cancer
- Infections
- Neurodegenerative diseases
- Addictions
- Sickle cell disease
- Muscle-degenerative conditions
- Toxicity
- Cardiovascular ailments
- Immune system problems
- Diabetes
- Fatty liver disease
Let us look at one of the many intriguing applications of this supplement:
NAC interferes with cardiovascular damage.
Whenever food is cooked, some of the sugars in the food are converted into substances called ‘AGEs’ (Advanced Glycation Endproducts). These are inflammatory chemicals that, when consumed, cause damage to the walls of arteries and veins, as well as accelerated aging in other tissues in the body. The body actually produces its own AGEs from sugars, but usually in smaller amounts than are found in cooked food. Diabetics, however, have a much higher AGE burden than non-diabetics do, because diabetes causes spikes in blood sugar levels.
In an important 2004 paper, researchers reported that diabetics experience substantially less damage to arteries when their consumption of AGEs is reduced. Furthermore, NAC interferes with a key process through which AGEs produce inflammation and tissue damage, and actually prevents AGEs from damaging vascular cells.
NAC suppresses many other harmful processes taking place in the body. It is an inexpensive supplement that is safe and easy to obtain — so it would be foolish not to take advantage of it.
Share and Enjoy
Anti-herpes, anti-aging, anti-cancer… BHT opposes the same things we do!
1393 days
BHT (Butylated Hydroxytoluene) , a distant relative of vitamin E, is an antioxidant widely used as an anti-aging supplement and to protect food from damage by oxidation and microorganisms.
BHT has two medically useful properties: it is a good antioxidant for neutralizing peroxide radicals that damage cells; and it “dissolves” in the membranes of cells and viruses, altering their interactions with other cells. BHT’s antioxidant properties are responsible for its benefits with regard to aging, cancer, cardiovascular disease, and brain damage; its membrane effects are responsible for its anti-viral benefits.
The body produces its own antioxidants, such as the enzyme catalase, so why do we need to add BHT and other supplemental antioxidants? The reason is that the body makes an inadequate supply and variety of its own antioxidants. Unless we supplement these with additional ones, considerable damage to DNA and other essential biological structures will take place.
In BHT’s other function, as a membrane manipulator, molecules of BHT merge with the membranes of viruses that have lipid envelopes (such as the herpes virus). The presence of enough BHT molecules in a viral envelope alters the envelope’s physical properties, making the viral particle unable to infect a human cell. This halts a viral infection’s spread within the body.
What is BHT good for?
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration requires us to state here that BHT is a food additive, not a supplement. Nevertheless, the medical literature suggests that BHT is also useful for:
- preventing viral infections, such as herpes, and terminating their outbreaks
- prevention of DNA damage and cancer by certain carcinogens
- protection of the brain from damage by alcohol
- increasing the tissue concentrations of Vitamin E
- preventing birth defects in diabetic pregnancies
- inhibiting atherosclerosis
BHT for herpes infections
To put it briefly, BHT has been shown to lower the incidence of herpes outbreaks, and to shorten the duration of those outbreaks that do occur. What’s more, the virus cannot develop resistance to BHT as it can to anti-viral drugs such as acyclovir — to which the herpes virus has already developed significant resistance. This is because BHT alters membrane properties that are not determined by viral genes — thus, the herpes viruses cannot evolve resistance to BHT by any rearrangement or mutation of their genes.
