nutritionfactsorg--2020-03-10--The Foods to Avoid to Lower Stroke Risk

The Foods to Avoid to Lower Stroke Risk

“ Stroke remains one of the most devastating of all neurological diseases , ” killing about 5 million people a year worldwide , and is “ the leading cause of permanent disability in the USA.
” But the good news is that about 80 percent of stroke risk may be due to basic lifestyle factors : primarily , improving our diet , stopping smoking , and getting regular exercise .
The best way to stop smoking , evidently , is to have a heart attack .
Certainly , once dead , you can ’ t smoke .
Of those who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ repeated advice from their doctor may persuade up to two-thirds to quit and never smoke again in any form as long as they live .
“ Yes , quitting smoking is very difficult .
It doesn ’ t matter ; it has to be done .
If you were walking along the lakeshore and one of your grandchildren is drowning , it doesn ’ t take will power to go into the lake ; it just has to be done.
” It ’ s like a healthy diet : Some things just have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ night to feed a baby can be difficult , too , but it ’ s not a matter of having willpower—some things in life just have to be done .
After all , what we regularly eat every day is indeed a matter of life and death .
For stroke prevention , that means eating a more plant-based diet , like a traditional Mediterranean diet centered around whole grains , fruits , vegetables , lentils , beans , and nuts , as I discuss in my video Best Foods to Reduce Stroke Risk @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also work , but it must be accompanied by a regular , reliable source of vitamin B12 , meaning B12-fortified foods or supplements .
“ Unfortunately , recommending taking B12 supplements may meet opposition among vegetarians because misconceptions regarding this nutrient are prevalent .
Many individuals still hold on to the old myth that deficiency of this vitamin is rare and occurs only in a small proportion of vegans…Future studies with vegetarians should focus on identifying ways of convincing vegetarians to routinely take vitamin B12 supplements in order to prevent a deficiency.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ What is it about plant-based diets that make them beneficial for stroke prevention ?
In my video How to Prevent a Stroke , I talked about the role of fiber , which potentially leads to about a 1 percent drop in risk for every 1 gram of fiber ingested per day .
Or , even better : A 12 percent drop in risk is associated with every extra 10 grams of fiber a day .
In fact , fiber from whole grains is associated with a lower chance of dying not only from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cancer , diabetes , and respiratory diseases , as well as a lower risk of dying from infections or other causes––in other words , a lower risk of dying prematurely from all causes combined .
Why ?
Perhaps because of the anti-inflammatory effects of fiber , which could explain how it could help across the board .
Or , it could be that eating fiber means eating fewer pro-inflammatory foods .
Those who eat more whole plant foods , which are where fiber is found , may be eating less processed and animal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ immediately preceding the meta-analysis of fiber was a meta-analysis on meat , which looked at red meat and processed meat , and found about a 10 percent increased risk for stroke associated with each three and a half ounce daily portion , which is about the size of a deck of playing cards , or about 10 percent increased risk for every “ half-deck ” of processed meat .
Perhaps this occurs because of the heme iron—the blood and muscle iron—in meat , or because of “ its pro-oxidative properties.
” ( No @ @ @ @ @ @ @ iron , which is the type of iron that predominates in plants . )
Or , perhaps it ’ s because of some of the toxic pollutants like PCBs that can build up in animal fats .
We ’ ve known , for example , that living next to a toxic waste dump might increase stroke risk , but only recently have we realized that dietary exposure even at so-called safe levels might increase stroke risk—and increase it by as much as eight or nine times for those with the highest levels of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more on how to reduce stroke risk with diet , see : • Does Diet Soda Increase Stroke Risk as Much as Regular Soda ?
What does vitamin B12 have to do with stroke ?
Watch my video Vitamin B12 Necessary for Arterial Health to find out .
PS : If you haven ’ t yet , you can subscribe to my free videos and watch my live presentations : • 2012 : Uprooting the Leading Causes of Death • 2013 : More Than an Apple a Day • 2014 : From Table @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Food • 2015 : Food as Medicine : Preventing and Treating the Most Dreaded Diseases with Diet • 2016 : How Not To Die : The Role of Diet in Preventing , Arresting , and Reversing Our Top 15 Killers

“Stroke remains one of the most devastating of all neurological diseases,” killing about 5 million people a year worldwide, and is “the leading cause of permanent disability in the USA.” But the good news is that about 80 percent of stroke risk may be due to basic lifestyle factors: primarily, improving our diet, stopping smoking, and getting regular exercise.
The best way to stop smoking, evidently, is to have a heart attack. Certainly, once dead, you can’t smoke. Of those who survive a heart attack, strong, repeated advice from their doctor may persuade up to two-thirds to quit and never smoke again in any form as long as they live. “Yes, quitting smoking is very difficult. It doesn’t matter; it has to be done. If you were walking along the lakeshore and one of your grandchildren is drowning, it doesn’t take will power to go into the lake; it just has to be done.” It’s like a healthy diet: Some things just have to be done. Getting up at night to feed a baby can be difficult, too, but it’s not a matter of having willpower—some things in life just have to be done. After all, what we regularly eat every day is indeed a matter of life and death.
For stroke prevention, that means eating a more plant-based diet, like a traditional Mediterranean diet centered around whole grains, fruits, vegetables, lentils, beans, and nuts, as I discuss in my video Best Foods to Reduce Stroke Risk. A vegetarian or vegan diet may also work, but it must be accompanied by a regular, reliable source of vitamin B12, meaning B12-fortified foods or supplements. “Unfortunately, recommending taking B12 supplements may meet opposition among vegetarians because misconceptions regarding this nutrient are prevalent. Many individuals still hold on to the old myth that deficiency of this vitamin is rare and occurs only in a small proportion of vegans…Future studies with vegetarians should focus on identifying ways of convincing vegetarians to routinely take vitamin B12 supplements in order to prevent a deficiency.” The research is clear on that.
What is it about plant-based diets that make them beneficial for stroke prevention? In my video How to Prevent a Stroke, I talked about the role of fiber, which potentially leads to about a 1 percent drop in risk for every 1 gram of fiber ingested per day. Or, even better: A 12 percent drop in risk is associated with every extra 10 grams of fiber a day. In fact, fiber from whole grains is associated with a lower chance of dying not only from heart attack and stroke, but also cancer, diabetes, and respiratory diseases, as well as a lower risk of dying from infections or other causes––in other words, a lower risk of dying prematurely from all causes combined. Why? Perhaps because of the anti-inflammatory effects of fiber, which could explain how it could help across the board. Or, it could be that eating fiber means eating fewer pro-inflammatory foods. Those who eat more whole plant foods, which are where fiber is found, may be eating less processed and animal foods. In fact, the study immediately preceding the meta-analysis of fiber was a meta-analysis on meat, which looked at red meat and processed meat, and found about a 10 percent increased risk for stroke associated with each three and a half ounce daily portion, which is about the size of a deck of playing cards, or about 10 percent increased risk for every “half-deck” of processed meat.
Perhaps this occurs because of the heme iron—the blood and muscle iron—in meat, or because of “its pro-oxidative properties.” (No association was found between stroke and non-heme iron, which is the type of iron that predominates in plants.) Or, perhaps it’s because of some of the toxic pollutants like PCBs that can build up in animal fats. We’ve known, for example, that living next to a toxic waste dump might increase stroke risk, but only recently have we realized that dietary exposure even at so-called safe levels might increase stroke risk—and increase it by as much as eight or nine times for those with the highest levels of these pollutants in their bloodstream.
For more on how to reduce stroke risk with diet, see:
What does vitamin B12 have to do with stroke? Watch my video Vitamin B12 Necessary for Arterial Health to find out.
In health,
Michael Greger, M.D.


nutritionfactsorg--2020-03-05--How to Boost the Fat Burning Hormone FIAF

Although recent increases in the availability of junk food and decreases “ in institutionally driven physical activity ” have created an obesity-permissive environment , several other factors may contribute .
We know , for example , that the use of antibiotics is linked to obesity , so our gut flora may play a role .
I discuss this in my video Is Obesity Infectious ?
.
Recently , specific bacterial species were identified .
Eight species seemed protective against weight gain , and they are all producers of a short-chain fatty acid called butyrate .
Early on , we thought @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were able to extract additional calories from what we eat , but the relationship between our gut flora and obesity has proven to be more complex , as you can see at 0:49 in my video .
Our gut flora may affect how we metabolize fat , for example , such as through the hormone FIAF—fasting-induced adipose factor .
While we ’ re fasting , our body has to stop storing fat and instead start to burn it off .
FIAF is one of the hormones that signals our body to do this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who is obese , and may be one way our gut flora manages our weight .
Some bacteria repress this hormone , thereby increasing fat storage .
In contrast , when we feed fiber to our fiber-eating bacteria , those that secrete short-chain fatty acids like butyrate are able to upregulate this hormone in all human cell lines so far tested .
“ Currently , when an individual fails to lose weight…the only other option is surgery , ” but “ [ a ] s the mechanisms of the microbiota ’ s [ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weight regulation are elucidated , one can envision transplanting intestinal contents from a thin individual into an obese individual.
” Such so-called fecal transplants may suffer from “ repulsive esthetics , ” though .
It turns out there may be easier ways to share .
We ’ ve known that people who live together share a greater similarity in gut bacteria than people living apart .
This could be because co-habitants inadvertently swap bacteria back and forth , or possibly because they eat similar diets , living in the same house .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only do co-habiting family members share bacteria with one another—they also share with their dogs , who are probably eating a different diet than they are .
You may be interested in the charts at 2:22 in my video .
In fact , it ’ s been “ suggest [ ed ] that homes harbor a distinct microbial fingerprint that can be predicted by their occupants.
” Just by swabbing the doorknobs , you can tell which family lives in which house , as shown at 2:35 in my video .
And , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ home , “ the microbial community in the new house rapidly converged ” or shifted toward that of the old house , “ suggesting rapid colonization by the family ’ s microbiota.
” Experimental evidence suggests that individuals raised in a household of lean people may be protected against obesity—no fecal transplant necessary .
( Indeed , people may be sharing gut bacteria from kitchen stools instead . )
Moreover , as we know , people living together share more bacteria than those living apart , but when a dog is added to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bacteria get even closer , as you can see at 3:11 in my video .
Dogs can act like a bridge to pass bacteria back and forth between people .
Curiously , owning cats doesn ’ t seem to have the same effect .
Maybe cats don ’ t tend to drink out of the toilet bowl as much as dogs do ?
Exposure to pet bacteria may actually be beneficial .
It ’ s “ intriguing to consider that who we cohabit with , including companion animals , may alter our physiological @ @ @ @ @ @ @ symbionts [ or bacteria ] that we harbor in and on our various body habitats.
” This may be why “ [ r ] ecent studies link early exposure to pets to decreased prevalence of allergies , respiratory conditions , and other immune disorders ” as kids grow older .
In my video Are Cats or Dogs More Protective for Children ’ s Health ?
, I talk about studies in which dog exposure early in life may decrease respiratory infections , especially ear infections .
Children with dogs “ were significantly healthier @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know why .
Indeed , we didn ’ t know the mechanism until , perhaps , now—with the first study tying together the protection from respiratory disease through pet exposure to differences in gut bacteria .
None of the studied infants in homes with pets suffered from wheezy bronchitis within the first two years of life , whereas 15 percent of the pet-deprived infants had .
And , when comparing stool samples , this correlated with differences in gut bacteria depending on the presence of pets in the home .
There was a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that a “ person ’ s chances of becoming obese increased by 57 % …if he or she had a friend who became obese , ” suggesting social ties have a big effect .
However , given the evidence implicating the role of gut bacteria in obesity , this “ raises up the possibility that cravings and associated obesity might not just be socially contagious ” —that is , because , for instance , you all go out together and eat the same fattening food— “ but rather truly infectious , like a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ role in obesity .
How ?
See Infectobesity : Adenovirus 36 and Childhood Obesity .
An Obesity-Causing Chicken Virus may help explain the link found between poultry consumption and weight gain , and you may also be interested in Chicken Big : Poultry and Obesity .
The important question : Can Morbid Obesity Be Reversed Through Diet ?
Find out in my video , and also check out Coconut Oil and Abdominal Fat .
For more on the amazing inner world in our guts , see : • How to Change Your Enterotype @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from Fossilized Feces • How to Become a Fecal Transplant Super Donor • Microbiome : We Are What They Eat PS : If you haven ’ t yet , you can subscribe to my free videos and watch my live presentations : • 2012 : Uprooting the Leading Causes of Death • 2013 : More Than an Apple a Day • 2014 : From Table to Able : Combating Disabling Diseases with Food • 2015 : Food as Medicine : Preventing and Treating the Most Dreaded Diseases with Diet • 2016 : How @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Diet in Preventing , Arresting , and Reversing Our Top 15 Killers

Although recent increases in the availability of junk food and decreases “in institutionally driven physical activity” have created an obesity-permissive environment, several other factors may contribute. We know, for example, that the use of antibiotics is linked to obesity, so our gut flora may play a role. I discuss this in my video Is Obesity Infectious?.
Recently, specific bacterial species were identified. Eight species seemed protective against weight gain, and they are all producers of a short-chain fatty acid called butyrate.
Early on, we thought there might be some intestinal bacteria that were able to extract additional calories from what we eat, but the relationship between our gut flora and obesity has proven to be more complex, as you can see at 0:49 in my video. Our gut flora may affect how we metabolize fat, for example, such as through the hormone FIAF—fasting-induced adipose factor.
While we’re fasting, our body has to stop storing fat and instead start to burn it off. FIAF is one of the hormones that signals our body to do this, which could be useful for someone who is obese, and may be one way our gut flora manages our weight. Some bacteria repress this hormone, thereby increasing fat storage. In contrast, when we feed fiber to our fiber-eating bacteria, those that secrete short-chain fatty acids like butyrate are able to upregulate this hormone in all human cell lines so far tested.
“Currently, when an individual fails to lose weight…the only other option is surgery,” but “[a]s the mechanisms of the microbiota’s [gut flora’s] role in weight regulation are elucidated, one can envision transplanting intestinal contents from a thin individual into an obese individual.” Such so-called fecal transplants may suffer from “repulsive esthetics,” though. It turns out there may be easier ways to share.
We’ve known that people who live together share a greater similarity in gut bacteria than people living apart. This could be because co-habitants inadvertently swap bacteria back and forth, or possibly because they eat similar diets, living in the same house. We didn’t know…until now. Not only do co-habiting family members share bacteria with one another—they also share with their dogs, who are probably eating a different diet than they are. You may be interested in the charts at 2:22 in my video.
In fact, it’s been “suggest[ed] that homes harbor a distinct microbial fingerprint that can be predicted by their occupants.” Just by swabbing the doorknobs, you can tell which family lives in which house, as shown at 2:35 in my video. And, when a family moves into a new home, “the microbial community in the new house rapidly converged” or shifted toward that of the old house, “suggesting rapid colonization by the family’s microbiota.” Experimental evidence suggests that individuals raised in a household of lean people may be protected against obesity—no fecal transplant necessary. (Indeed, people may be sharing gut bacteria from kitchen stools instead.)
Moreover, as we know, people living together share more bacteria than those living apart, but when a dog is added to the mix, the people’s bacteria get even closer, as you can see at 3:11 in my video. Dogs can act like a bridge to pass bacteria back and forth between people. Curiously, owning cats doesn’t seem to have the same effect. Maybe cats don’t tend to drink out of the toilet bowl as much as dogs do?
Exposure to pet bacteria may actually be beneficial. It’s “intriguing to consider that who we cohabit with, including companion animals, may alter our physiological properties by influencing the consortia of microbial symbionts [or bacteria] that we harbor in and on our various body habitats.” This may be why “[r]ecent studies link early exposure to pets to decreased prevalence of allergies, respiratory conditions, and other immune disorders” as kids grow older. In my video Are Cats or Dogs More Protective for Children’s Health?, I talk about studies in which dog exposure early in life may decrease respiratory infections, especially ear infections. Children with dogs “were significantly healthier,” but we didn’t know why. Indeed, we didn’t know the mechanism until, perhaps, now—with the first study tying together the protection from respiratory disease through pet exposure to differences in gut bacteria. None of the studied infants in homes with pets suffered from wheezy bronchitis within the first two years of life, whereas 15 percent of the pet-deprived infants had. And, when comparing stool samples, this correlated with differences in gut bacteria depending on the presence of pets in the home.
There was a famous study of 12,000 people that found that a “person’s chances of becoming obese increased by 57%…if he or she had a friend who became obese,” suggesting social ties have a big effect. However, given the evidence implicating the role of gut bacteria in obesity, this “raises up the possibility that cravings and associated obesity might not just be socially contagious”—that is, because, for instance, you all go out together and eat the same fattening food—“but rather truly infectious, like a cold.”
Viruses may also play a role in obesity. How? See Infectobesity: Adenovirus 36 and Childhood Obesity. An Obesity-Causing Chicken Virus may help explain the link found between poultry consumption and weight gain, and you may also be interested in Chicken Big: Poultry and Obesity.
The important question: Can Morbid Obesity Be Reversed Through Diet? Find out in my video, and also check out Coconut Oil and Abdominal Fat.
For more on the amazing inner world in our guts, see:
In health,
Michael Greger, M.D.


nutritionfactsorg--2020-03-03--What Happens When Pregnant Women Eat More Animal Protein

Are high-protein diets during pregnancy healthful or harmful ?
That question was answered about 40 years ago in the infamous Harlem Trial of 1976 : a “ randomized controlled trial of nutritional supplementation pregnancy , in a poor black urban population in the United States.
” The study , which I discuss in my video The Effect of Animal Protein on Stress Hormones , Testosterone , and Pregnancy , “ was begun when protein was commonly assumed to be deficient in the diet of the poor.
” Had researchers actually analyzed their diets before they started , they would have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but why let facts get in the way of assumptions ?
So , the researchers split poor black pregnant women into three groups , each receiving one of the following treatments : ( 1 ) an extra 40 grams of animal protein a day , which is essentially a couple cans of Ensure , ( 2 ) an extra 6 grams of animal protein , or ( 3 ) no extra protein .
Then they sat back and watched what happened .
The high-protein group suffered “ an excess of very early @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ] deaths , and there was significant growth retardation ” in the babies who survived .
More protein meant more prematurity , more deaths , and more growth retardation , which you can see reflected in the chart at 1:00 in my video .
What ’ s more , animal protein intake during pregnancy has been associated with children becoming overweight later in life and getting high blood pressure .
The “ offspring of mothers who reported eating more meat and fish had higher systolic blood pressure ” in adulthood .
This was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in which mothers were advised to eat a pound of meat a day .
The increased weight gain and high blood pressure may be due to the obesity-causing chemical pollutants in the meat supply , as I ’ ve discussed in my video Animal Protein , Pregnancy , and Childhood Obesity , or the animal protein-induced rise in the growth hormone IGF-1 .
Or , it could be due to a steroid stress hormone called cortisol .
As you can see in the chart at 2:01 in my video , a single meal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the level of the stress hormone in the blood within a half hour of consumption , much more than a meal closer to the recommended level of protein .
When subjects are given a meal of crab , tuna fish , and cottage cheese , the stress hormone level shoots up .
If they ’ re instead given some barley soup and a vegetable stir-fry on rice , the stress hormone level goes down after the meal , as you can see at 2:27 in my video .
Imagine eating meat-fish-dairy meals day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chronically stimulate ” our stress response axis “ and increase the release of vasoactive hormones ” that could increase our blood pressure .
And , all that extra cortisol release has been linked to increased risk for elevated blood levels of insulin , triglycerides , and cholesterol .
When men on a high-protein diet , “ such as meat , fish , poultry , egg white , ” were switched to a high-carb diet of bread , vegetables , fruit , and sugary junk , their cortisol levels dropped about a quarter within @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , their testosterone levels shot up by about the same amount , as you can see at 3:09 in my video .
High-protein diets suppress testosterone .
That is why , if men eating plant-based diets begin to eat meat every day , their testosterone levels go down and some estrogens actually go up , and that ’ s why bodybuilders can get such low testosterone levels .
It ’ s not the steroids they ’ re taking .
If you look at natural bodybuilders who don ’ t use steroids , there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ levels in the months leading up to a competition .
Testosterone levels were cut by more than half , which is enough to drop a guy into an abnormally low range , as you can see at 3:47 in my video .
It ’ s ironic that they ’ re eating protein to look manly on the outside , but it can make them less and less manly on the inside .
And , from an obesity standpoint , in general , a drop in testosterone levels may increase the risk of gaining @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cortisol have to do with weight ?
There ’ s actually a disease caused by having too much cortisol , called Cushing ’ s syndrome , which can increase abdominal obesity .
Even in normal women , though , chronic stress and chronic high cortisol levels can contribute to obesity .
What ’ s more , if they ’ re pregnant , high-meat and low-carb diets may increase cortisol levels in the moms , which can lead to inappropriate fetal exposure to cortisol , which , in turn , can affect the developing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stress response thermostat and leading to higher cortisol levels in later adult life .
This can have serious , life-long health consequences .
Every maternal daily portion of meat and fish was associated with 5 percent higher cortisol levels in their children as much as 30 years later , though green vegetable consumption was found to be protective .
Higher meat consumption , such as three servings a day compared to one or two , was associated with significantly higher cortisol levels , but eating greens every day appeared to blunt some of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can see at 5:12 in my video .
As well , the adult children of mothers who ate a lot of meat during pregnancy don ’ t only have higher stress hormone levels , they also appear to react more negatively to whatever life throws at them .
Researchers put them through the Trier Test , which involves public speaking in front of a panel of judges , following by a live math exercise .
You can see in my video at 5:36 a chart comparing the stress hormone responses in those whose @ @ @ @ @ @ @ meat per day , about two servings a day , or about two to three servings a day .
Note that before the test started , the cortisol levels of the two groups eating less meat started out about the same , but their exaggerated cortisol response was laid bare when exposed to a stressful situation .
The real-world effects of this are that after that sort of test , when people are given their own private snack buffet with fruits and veggies versus fatty , sugary , comfort foods like chocolate cake @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the fruits and veggies ?
Those who have high chronic stress levels .
“ Cortisol has been implicated as a factor in motivating food intake ” even when we aren ’ t really hungry .
It ’ s no surprise then that a woman ’ s animal protein intake during pregnancy may lead to larger weight gain for her children later in life—and maybe even for her grandchildren .
“ Remarkably , recent evidence suggests that the long-term consequences of adverse conditions during early development may not be limited to one generation , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the generations to follow , even if these individuals develop in normal conditions themselves.
” Indeed , the diet of a pregnant mother may affect the development and disease risk of her children and even her grandchildren .
Ultimately , these findings may shed light on our rapidly expanding epidemics of diabetes , obesity , and heart disease .
Whoa , there was a lot to unpack !
Rather than break it up , since so much of it was tied together , as you could see , I compiled everything into this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ want to read this a second time and watch the video to absorb it all .
For more on how a woman ’ s diet during pregnancy can affect her children , see Maternal Diet May Affect Stress Responses in Children and Animal Protein , Pregnancy , and Childhood Obesity .
Protein is such a misunderstood nutrient .
For more information , check out : • Do Vegetarians Get Enough Protein ?
PS : If you haven ’ t yet , you can subscribe to my free videos and watch my live presentations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Causes of Death • 2013 : More Than an Apple a Day • 2014 : From Table to Able : Combating Disabling Diseases with Food • 2015 : Food as Medicine : Preventing and Treating the Most Dreaded Diseases with Diet • 2016 : How Not To Die : The Role of Diet in Preventing , Arresting , and Reversing Our Top 15 Killers

Are high-protein diets during pregnancy healthful or harmful? That question was answered about 40 years ago in the infamous Harlem Trial of 1976: a “randomized controlled trial of nutritional supplementation pregnancy, in a poor black urban population in the United States.” The study, which I discuss in my video The Effect of Animal Protein on Stress Hormones, Testosterone, and Pregnancy, “was begun when protein was commonly assumed to be deficient in the diet of the poor.” Had researchers actually analyzed their diets before they started, they would have realized that this wasn’t true, but why let facts get in the way of assumptions? So, the researchers split poor black pregnant women into three groups, each receiving one of the following treatments: (1) an extra 40 grams of animal protein a day, which is essentially a couple cans of Ensure, (2) an extra 6 grams of animal protein, or (3) no extra protein. Then they sat back and watched what happened. The high-protein group suffered “an excess of very early premature births and associated neonatal [infant] deaths, and there was significant growth retardation” in the babies who survived. More protein meant more prematurity, more deaths, and more growth retardation, which you can see reflected in the chart at 1:00 in my video.
What’s more, animal protein intake during pregnancy has been associated with children becoming overweight later in life and getting high blood pressure. The “offspring of mothers who reported eating more meat and fish had higher systolic blood pressure” in adulthood. This was part of another failed dietary intervention trial in which mothers were advised to eat a pound of meat a day. The increased weight gain and high blood pressure may be due to the obesity-causing chemical pollutants in the meat supply, as I’ve discussed in my video Animal Protein, Pregnancy, and Childhood Obesity, or the animal protein-induced rise in the growth hormone IGF-1. Or, it could be due to a steroid stress hormone called cortisol.
As you can see in the chart at 2:01 in my video, a single meal high in animal protein can nearly double the level of the stress hormone in the blood within a half hour of consumption, much more than a meal closer to the recommended level of protein. When subjects are given a meal of crab, tuna fish, and cottage cheese, the stress hormone level shoots up. If they’re instead given some barley soup and a vegetable stir-fry on rice, the stress hormone level goes down after the meal, as you can see at 2:27 in my video. Imagine eating meat-fish-dairy meals day after day. Doing so “may chronically stimulate” our stress response axis “and increase the release of vasoactive hormones” that could increase our blood pressure. And, all that extra cortisol release has been linked to increased risk for elevated blood levels of insulin, triglycerides, and cholesterol.
When men on a high-protein diet, “such as meat, fish, poultry, egg white,” were switched to a high-carb diet of bread, vegetables, fruit, and sugary junk, their cortisol levels dropped about a quarter within 10 days. At the same time, their testosterone levels shot up by about the same amount, as you can see at 3:09 in my video. High-protein diets suppress testosterone. That is why, if men eating plant-based diets begin to eat meat every day, their testosterone levels go down and some estrogens actually go up, and that’s why bodybuilders can get such low testosterone levels. It’s not the steroids they’re taking. If you look at natural bodybuilders who don’t use steroids, there is a 75 percent drop in testosterone levels in the months leading up to a competition. Testosterone levels were cut by more than half, which is enough to drop a guy into an abnormally low range, as you can see at 3:47 in my video. It’s ironic that they’re eating protein to look manly on the outside, but it can make them less and less manly on the inside. And, from an obesity standpoint, in general, a drop in testosterone levels may increase the risk of gaining weight and body fat. What does cortisol have to do with weight?
There’s actually a disease caused by having too much cortisol, called Cushing’s syndrome, which can increase abdominal obesity. Even in normal women, though, chronic stress and chronic high cortisol levels can contribute to obesity. What’s more, if they’re pregnant, high-meat and low-carb diets may increase cortisol levels in the moms, which can lead to inappropriate fetal exposure to cortisol, which, in turn, can affect the developing fetus, resetting her or his whole stress response thermostat and leading to higher cortisol levels in later adult life. This can have serious, life-long health consequences. Every maternal daily portion of meat and fish was associated with 5 percent higher cortisol levels in their children as much as 30 years later, though green vegetable consumption was found to be protective. Higher meat consumption, such as three servings a day compared to one or two, was associated with significantly higher cortisol levels, but eating greens every day appeared to blunt some of that excess stress response, as you can see at 5:12 in my video.
As well, the adult children of mothers who ate a lot of meat during pregnancy don’t only have higher stress hormone levels, they also appear to react more negatively to whatever life throws at them. Researchers put them through the Trier Test, which involves public speaking in front of a panel of judges, following by a live math exercise. You can see in my video at 5:36 a chart comparing the stress hormone responses in those whose moms ate less than two servings of meat per day, about two servings a day, or about two to three servings a day. Note that before the test started, the cortisol levels of the two groups eating less meat started out about the same, but their exaggerated cortisol response was laid bare when exposed to a stressful situation. The real-world effects of this are that after that sort of test, when people are given their own private snack buffet with fruits and veggies versus fatty, sugary, comfort foods like chocolate cake, guess who may eat less of the fruits and veggies? Those who have high chronic stress levels. “Cortisol has been implicated as a factor in motivating food intake” even when we aren’t really hungry.
It’s no surprise then that a woman’s animal protein intake during pregnancy may lead to larger weight gain for her children later in life—and maybe even for her grandchildren. “Remarkably, recent evidence suggests that the long-term consequences of adverse conditions during early development may not be limited to one generation, but may lead to poor health in the generations to follow, even if these individuals develop in normal conditions themselves.” Indeed, the diet of a pregnant mother may affect the development and disease risk of her children and even her grandchildren. Ultimately, these findings may shed light on our rapidly expanding epidemics of diabetes, obesity, and heart disease.
Whoa, there was a lot to unpack! Rather than break it up, since so much of it was tied together, as you could see, I compiled everything into this one, heftier piece. You may want to read this a second time and watch the video to absorb it all.
For more on how a woman’s diet during pregnancy can affect her children, see Maternal Diet May Affect Stress Responses in Children and Animal Protein, Pregnancy, and Childhood Obesity.
Protein is such a misunderstood nutrient. For more information, check out:
In health,
Michael Greger, M.D.


nutritionfactsorg--2020-02-27--Supplement Labeling Fraud is Widespread

Supplement Labeling Fraud is Widespread

The regulation of dietary supplements in the United States has been described as “ too little , too late.
” “ Dietary supplements may be adulterated with dangerous compounds , be contaminated , fail to contain the purported active ingredient , or contain unknown doses of the ingredients stated on the label ; be sold at toxic dosages ; or produce harmful effects ” in other ways .
As I discuss in my video Black Raspberry Supplements Put to the Test , “ [ i ] f the composition and quality of ingredients can not be reliably ensured , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ questionable .
Moreover , the health of the US public is put at risk.
” A private , third-party company that has independently tested thousands of supplements “ identifies approximately 1 in 4 with a quality problem ” because it either does not contain what it says it contains , is “ of substandard quality , ” or is contaminated in some way .
Let ’ s look at an example .
I ’ ve produced a few videos on the remarkable properties of black raspberries , including one on oral cancer .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ found fresh or frozen , so how about black raspberry supplements , which are available in stores and online ?
At 0:56 in my video , I show a bottle of Pure Black Raspberry by Pure Health , that says “ Fresh – Raw – Pure ” right on the label .
Sounds good , don ’ t you think ?
When we look at the back of the bottle , the label says it contains only seedless black raspberry powder “ and absolutely nothing else !
” It ’ s nice to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ingredients , so why not plunk down $ 23.77 for a bottle ?
Well , it turns out we ’ ve been had .
The first clue is that the image on the front of the label is actually blackberries that had been Photoshopped to look like black raspberries .
Pure Health couldn ’ t even be bothered to put a real image on its fake supplement !
The second clue is that the “ [ d ] ark olive-brown-black powder in [ the ] capsule did not look like berry powder and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the researchers .
So , it was put it to the test , and , indeed , there was no black raspberry at all .
Instead of promoting the fact that the Pure Black Raspberry contains only seedless black raspberry powder “ and absolutely nothing else , ” the company should have just listed that the bottle contains “ absolutely nothing ” period—or , at least we hope it contains nothing .
Who knows what ’ s actually in the capsules !
The researchers tested every black raspberry product they could find @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the correct picture on the front and with powder that actually looked like it came from real black raspberries , more than a third appeared to have no black raspberry fruit at all .
“ At the moment , a consumer who assumes the US dietary supplement marketplace is free from risk ” —or is even honest— “ is unfortunately naive.
” How widespread is this deception ?
Researchers used DNA fingerprinting techniques to test the authenticity of 44 herbal supplements from a dozen different companies .
As you can see at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ half of the supplements were authentic and actually contained what they said they did .
Most contained plants not listed on the label and product substitution , and many “ contained contaminants and or fillers , ” also not listed on the label .
This isn ’ t just fraud : Some of this deception could really hurt people .
For example , one St. John ’ s wort supplement contained no St. John ’ s wort at all .
Instead , it was actually senna , which is an herbal laxative that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chronic diarrhea , cathartic colon , liver damage , abdominal pain , epidermal [ skin ] breakdown and blistering.
” In the video at 3:09 , you can see how the 12 companies did .
Tested products from only 2 of the 12 companies appeared to be completely authentic , with the remaining 10 companies ’ products containing filler , product substitution , and/or contaminants .
Herbs only work if they ’ re actually present .
Indeed , this study found that 80 percent of the manufacturers in the supplement “ industry suffer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Until US dietary supplement products are better regulated and quality control standards for safety , purity , and dosage are defined and endorsed , the safer source for dietary phenolics , ” or phytonutrients , “ as a consumer is from food intake.
” For more on supplement company shenanigans , see : • Pharmacists vs. Health Food Store Employees : Who Gives Better Advice ?
• Some Dietary Supplements May Be More Than a Waste of Money What ’ s so special about black raspberries ?
Reversal of cancer progression , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Oral Cancer and Best Fruits for Cancer Prevention .
PS : If you haven ’ t yet , you can subscribe to my free videos and watch my live presentations : • 2012 : Uprooting the Leading Causes of Death • 2013 : More Than an Apple a Day • 2014 : From Table to Able : Combating Disabling Diseases with Food • 2015 : Food as Medicine : Preventing and Treating the Most Dreaded Diseases with Diet • 2016 : How Not To Die : The Role of Diet in Preventing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 15 Killers

The regulation of dietary supplements in the United States has been described as “too little, too late.” “Dietary supplements may be adulterated with dangerous compounds, be contaminated, fail to contain the purported active ingredient, or contain unknown doses of the ingredients stated on the label; be sold at toxic dosages; or produce harmful effects” in other ways. As I discuss in my video Black Raspberry Supplements Put to the Test, “[i]f the composition and quality of ingredients cannot be reliably ensured, the validity of research on dietary supplements is questionable. Moreover, the health of the US public is put at risk.”
A private, third-party company that has independently tested thousands of supplements “identifies approximately 1 in 4 with a quality problem” because it either does not contain what it says it contains, is “of substandard quality,” or is contaminated in some way.
Let’s look at an example. I’ve produced a few videos on the remarkable properties of black raspberries, including one on oral cancer. These berries can’t always be found fresh or frozen, so how about black raspberry supplements, which are available in stores and online? At 0:56 in my video, I show a bottle of Pure Black Raspberry by Pure Health, that says “Fresh – Raw – Pure” right on the label. Sounds good, don’t you think? When we look at the back of the bottle, the label says it contains only seedless black raspberry powder “and absolutely nothing else!” It’s nice to see there are no fillers or artificial ingredients, so why not plunk down $23.77 for a bottle? Well, it turns out we’ve been had.
The first clue is that the image on the front of the label is actually blackberries that had been Photoshopped to look like black raspberries. Pure Health couldn’t even be bothered to put a real image on its fake supplement! The second clue is that the “[d]ark olive-brown-black powder in [the] capsule did not look like berry powder and had a medicinal odor,” according to the researchers. So, it was put it to the test, and, indeed, there was no black raspberry at all. Instead of promoting the fact that the Pure Black Raspberry contains only seedless black raspberry powder “and absolutely nothing else,” the company should have just listed that the bottle contains “absolutely nothing” period—or, at least we hope it contains nothing. Who knows what’s actually in the capsules!
The researchers tested every black raspberry product they could find, and, even of the ones with the correct picture on the front and with powder that actually looked like it came from real black raspberries, more than a third appeared to have no black raspberry fruit at all. “At the moment, a consumer who assumes the US dietary supplement marketplace is free from risk”—or is even honest—“is unfortunately naive.”
How widespread is this deception? Researchers used DNA fingerprinting techniques to test the authenticity of 44 herbal supplements from a dozen different companies. As you can see at 2:33 in my video, less than half of the supplements were authentic and actually contained what they said they did. Most contained plants not listed on the label and product substitution, and many “contained contaminants and or fillers,” also not listed on the label. This isn’t just fraud: Some of this deception could really hurt people. For example, one St. John’s wort supplement contained no St. John’s wort at all. Instead, it was actually senna, which is an herbal laxative that “can cause adverse effects such as chronic diarrhea, cathartic colon, liver damage, abdominal pain, epidermal [skin] breakdown and blistering.” In the video at 3:09, you can see how the 12 companies did. Tested products from only 2 of the 12 companies appeared to be completely authentic, with the remaining 10 companies’ products containing filler, product substitution, and/or contaminants. Herbs only work if they’re actually present. Indeed, this study found that 80 percent of the manufacturers in the supplement “industry suffer[] from unethical activities…”.
“Until US dietary supplement products are better regulated and quality control standards for safety, purity, and dosage are defined and endorsed, the safer source for dietary phenolics,” or phytonutrients, “as a consumer is from food intake.”
For more on supplement company shenanigans, see:
What’s so special about black raspberries? Reversal of cancer progression, for starters! See Black Raspberries vs. Oral Cancer and Best Fruits for Cancer Prevention.
In health,
Michael Greger, M.D.


nutritionfactsorg--2020-02-25--Proof that Lifelong Cholesterol Reduction Prevents Heart Disease

“ It is well accepted that coronary atherosclerosis is a chronic progressive disease that begins early in life and slowly progresses over several decades ” before symptoms arise .
However , the average age in cholesterol-lowering drug trials is 63 ; therefore , people have already been exposed to a lifetime of circulating LDL cholesterol .
It ’ s no wonder pharmaceutical therapies typically reduce cardiovascular disease risk by only 20 to 30 percent .
We know LDL , the so-called bad cholesterol , plays “ a central role ” in the “ initiation , development , and progression ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , more than 100 prospective studies involving more than a million people have demonstrated that those with higher LDL levels are at higher risk .
“ It seems reasonable to assume , therefore , that if lowering LDL-C [ cholesterol ] levels beginning later in life can slow the progression of advanced atherosclerotic plaques…then keeping LDL-C levels low , beginning much earlier in life ” might prevent our arteries from getting clogged in the first place .
A reasonable assumption , certainly—but let ’ s not just assume .
“ It would be…unethical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in which young adults with elevated serum cholesterol levels were treated or not treated over their lifetime ” —just as we couldn ’ t ethically set up a study in which half the young adults are made to start smoking to see if smoking really does cause lung cancer .
That ’ s where observational studies come in .
We can follow people who already smoke and compare their disease rates to those who don ’ t .
It was around 40 years ago when the president of the American Heart Association tried @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even though there were no randomized controlled trials .
You can see a copy of the “ Presidential Address ” entitled “ The Case for Prevention of Coronary Heart Disease ” to the AHA ’ s 47th Scientific Sessions at 1:34 in my video .
Those who smoke have a higher risk of heart attack , and the more we smoke the higher the risk .
After we stop smoking , our risk drops .
The same can be said for high cholesterol .
Young men 18 through 39 years of age were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and their cholesterol levels , even when they were young , predicted long-term risk of heart disease and death .
Men in their 20s and 30s who have a total cholesterol just under 200 have a “ substantially longer estimated life expectancy ” —around 4 to 9 years longer—than those with levels over 240 .
“ Evidence from observational studies , however , [ is ] vulnerable to confounding ” factors .
Eating a diet that is plant-based enough to lower cholesterol below average , for example , may add years to our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is .
Ideally , we ’ d have a long-term , randomized , controlled trial .
Nature may have actually set one up for us .
Each of us , at conception , gets a random assortment of genes from our mother and our father , and some of those genes may affect our cholesterol levels .
Just like there are rare genetic mutations that result in unusually high cholesterol levels , there are rare genetic mutations that lead to unusually low cholesterol levels , “ provid [ ing ] an ideal system @ @ @ @ @ @ @ low LDL cholesterol levels independently of other factors that may modify disease progression , ” such as confounding diet and lifestyle factors .
Starting at 3:14 in my video , you can see what I mean .
About 1 in 40 African Americans have a mutation that drops their LDL cholesterol from around 130 down toward more optimal levels .
Now , this group didn ’ t eat healthy to achieve that drop .
It ’ s just in their genes .
More than half had high blood pressure and there were a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ group , yet those with genetically low LDL levels still had a significant reduction in the incidence of coronary heart disease even in the presence of all those other risk factors .
How significant ?
How much less heart disease ?
A remarkable 88 percent of heart disease was simply gone .
The astounding finding was that the risk of heart disease in these individuals was reduced by more than 80 percent , whereas the same 20- to 40-point decrease in LDL from drugs only reduces risk around 30 percent .
Makes sense @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the mutation had low levels their entire life .
They didn ’ t simply start taking a pill when they were 60 .
“ The magnitude of the effect of long-term exposure to lower LDL-C [ cholesterol ] concentrations observed in each of these studies represents a threefold greater reduction in the risk of CHD , ” or coronary heart disease , compared to drug treatment started later in life .
( As an aside , for all of my fellow research nerds , check out that p value shown in my video @ @ @ @ @ @ @ d have to do around a quintillion studies to get that kind of result by chance ! )
“ Therefore , a primary prevention strategy that promotes keeping LDL [ cholesterol ] levels as low as possible , beginning as early in life as possible , and sustaining those low levels of LDL [ cholesterol ] throughout the whole of one ’ s lifetime has the potential to dramatically reduce the risk of CHD , ” coronary heart disease .
If you don ’ t know your cholesterol level , you should get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ See my video Should All Children Have Their Cholesterol Checked ?
to learn more .
What if you do get tested and your doctor tells you not to worry because your cholesterol ’ s “ normal ” ?
Having a “ normal ” cholesterol level in the society where it ’ s normal to drop dead of a heart attack ( the number-one killer of men and women ) is not really such a good thing .
See my video When Low-Risk Means High-Risk .
Check out Optimal Cholesterol Level and What ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ find out where you should be .
What if your doctor tells you your LDL is large and fluffy ?
See my video Does Cholesterol Size Matter ?
.
PS : If you haven ’ t yet , you can subscribe to my free videos and watch my live presentations : • 2012 : Uprooting the Leading Causes of Death • 2013 : More Than an Apple a Day • 2014 : From Table to Able : Combating Disabling Diseases with Food • 2015 : Food as Medicine : Preventing and Treating the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : How Not To Die : The Role of Diet in Preventing , Arresting , and Reversing Our Top 15 Killers

“It is well accepted that coronary atherosclerosis is a chronic progressive disease that begins early in life and slowly progresses over several decades” before symptoms arise. However, the average age in cholesterol-lowering drug trials is 63; therefore, people have already been exposed to a lifetime of circulating LDL cholesterol. It’s no wonder pharmaceutical therapies typically reduce cardiovascular disease risk by only 20 to 30 percent.
We know LDL, the so-called bad cholesterol, plays “a central role” in the “initiation, development, and progression” of our number-one killer. In fact, more than 100 prospective studies involving more than a million people have demonstrated that those with higher LDL levels are at higher risk.
“It seems reasonable to assume, therefore, that if lowering LDL-C [cholesterol] levels beginning later in life can slow the progression of advanced atherosclerotic plaques…then keeping LDL-C levels low, beginning much earlier in life” might prevent our arteries from getting clogged in the first place. A reasonable assumption, certainly—but let’s not just assume.
“It would be…unethical to set up a controlled clinical trial in which young adults with elevated serum cholesterol levels were treated or not treated over their lifetime”—just as we couldn’t ethically set up a study in which half the young adults are made to start smoking to see if smoking really does cause lung cancer. That’s where observational studies come in. We can follow people who already smoke and compare their disease rates to those who don’t.
It was around 40 years ago when the president of the American Heart Association tried to argue we should all stop smoking even though there were no randomized controlled trials. You can see a copy of the “Presidential Address” entitled “The Case for Prevention of Coronary Heart Disease” to the AHA’s 47th Scientific Sessions at 1:34 in my video. Those who smoke have a higher risk of heart attack, and the more we smoke the higher the risk. After we stop smoking, our risk drops. The same can be said for high cholesterol.
Young men 18 through 39 years of age were followed for up to 34 years, and their cholesterol levels, even when they were young, predicted long-term risk of heart disease and death. Men in their 20s and 30s who have a total cholesterol just under 200 have a “substantially longer estimated life expectancy”—around 4 to 9 years longer—than those with levels over 240.
“Evidence from observational studies, however, [is] vulnerable to confounding” factors. Eating a diet that is plant-based enough to lower cholesterol below average, for example, may add years to our lives regardless of what our cholesterol actually is. Ideally, we’d have a long-term, randomized, controlled trial.
Nature may have actually set one up for us. Each of us, at conception, gets a random assortment of genes from our mother and our father, and some of those genes may affect our cholesterol levels. Just like there are rare genetic mutations that result in unusually high cholesterol levels, there are rare genetic mutations that lead to unusually low cholesterol levels, “provid[ing] an ideal system in which to assess the consequences of low LDL cholesterol levels independently of other factors that may modify disease progression,” such as confounding diet and lifestyle factors.
Starting at 3:14 in my video, you can see what I mean. About 1 in 40 African Americans have a mutation that drops their LDL cholesterol from around 130 down toward more optimal levels. Now, this group didn’t eat healthy to achieve that drop. It’s just in their genes. More than half had high blood pressure and there were a lot of smokers and diabetics in the group, yet those with genetically low LDL levels still had a significant reduction in the incidence of coronary heart disease even in the presence of all those other risk factors. How significant? How much less heart disease? A remarkable 88 percent of heart disease was simply gone.
The astounding finding was that the risk of heart disease in these individuals was reduced by more than 80 percent, whereas the same 20- to 40-point decrease in LDL from drugs only reduces risk around 30 percent. Makes sense, though, because the folks with the mutation had low levels their entire life. They didn’t simply start taking a pill when they were 60.
“The magnitude of the effect of long-term exposure to lower LDL-C [cholesterol] concentrations observed in each of these studies represents a threefold greater reduction in the risk of CHD,” or coronary heart disease, compared to drug treatment started later in life. (As an aside, for all of my fellow research nerds, check out that p value shown in my video at the 4:30 mark. You’d have to do around a quintillion studies to get that kind of result by chance!)
“Therefore, a primary prevention strategy that promotes keeping LDL [cholesterol] levels as low as possible, beginning as early in life as possible, and sustaining those low levels of LDL [cholesterol] throughout the whole of one’s lifetime has the potential to dramatically reduce the risk of CHD,” coronary heart disease.
If you don’t know your cholesterol level, you should get it checked—maybe even starting in childhood. See my video Should All Children Have Their Cholesterol Checked? to learn more.
What if you do get tested and your doctor tells you not to worry because your cholesterol’s “normal”? Having a “normal” cholesterol level in the society where it’s normal to drop dead of a heart attack (the number-one killer of men and women) is not really such a good thing. See my video When Low-Risk Means High-Risk.
Check out Optimal Cholesterol Level and What’s the Optimal Cholesterol Level? to find out where you should be.
What if your doctor tells you your LDL is large and fluffy? See my video Does Cholesterol Size Matter?.
In health,
Michael Greger, M.D.


nutritionfactsorg--2020-02-20--All Children Should Have Their Cholesterol Checked Between Ages 9 and 11

Coronary artery disease does not magically appear .
The disease begins “ during early childhood and progress [ es ] unrecognized for several decades to its often final and unexpected endpoint of chest pain , disability , or premature death.
” As I discuss in my video Should All Children Have Their Cholesterol Checked ?
, “ we need to remind ourselves that atherosclerosis begins in childhood as fatty streaks ” in the arteries , which “ are the precursors of the advanced lesions that ultimately ” kill us .
By the time we ’ re in our 20s , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the artery coming off the heart is covered in fatty streaks , as you can see at 0:58 in my video .
Fifty years ago , pathologists began raising the question of whether heart disease is best handled by cardiologists or by pediatricians .
“ By their 30s , many young adults already have advanced coronary atherosclerosis , ” so , in reality , intervention during our 30s and beyond “ is actually secondary prevention , because advanced atherosclerosis is likely already present.
” Indeed , intervention is just trying to mediate the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the disease itself .
What ’ s more , we are exporting the problem around the world .
A study of young , thin , apparently healthy individuals found 97 percent of their collected arteries had atherosclerosis , which you can see at 4:52 in my video .
So , even in developing countries like Brazil , where they ’ ve acquired our eating habits , we ’ re seeing an epidemic of heart disease and sudden death .
“ Moreover , the risk factors that correlate with the extent of such early @ @ @ @ @ @ @ correlate with myocardial infarction [ or , heart attacks ] later in life.
” In other words , it ’ s the same disease but in the early stages .
So , pathologists , the ones doing the autopsies on all these young people and seeing all this coronary artery disease , “ began urging many years ago that preventive measures should be instituted earlier in life.
” We ’ ve known that fatty streaks exist in young children for more than a century , but it wasn ’ t until 1994 that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ came up with a “ radical ” idea : “ The strategic key , and the greatest opportunity in preventing [ cardiovascular disease ] CVD , is to prevent the development of CVD risk in the first place.
” In my video Heart Disease Starts in Childhood , I noted that fatty streaks , the first stage of atherosclerosis , were found in the arteries of nearly 100 percent of kids by age ten who were raised on the standard American diet .
In recognition of this fact , the latest Academy of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to get their cholesterol tested starting between the ages of 9 and 11 .
Of course , this has drug companies salivating at the thought of slipping statins into Happy Meals , but “ long-term drug intervention is costly and may be associated with adverse effects.
” So , the conversation is about lifestyle modification .
In my video How Many Meet the Simple Seven ?
, I revealed the breathtaking statistic that only about 1 in 2,000 U.S. adults met the seven American Heart Association criteria for a heart-healthy lifestyle .
What @ @ @ @ @ @ @ adolescents aged 12 to 19 who were studied , zero made the cut .
Not one teen “ exhibited ideal levels of all 7 cardiovascular health behaviors and health factors.
” Most teen boys and girls don ’ t smoke , and most aren ’ t overweight .
What was the main sticking point ?
Almost no one ate a healthy diet .
Indeed , less than 1 percent of young men and women met a minimum of healthy diet criteria .
This sorry state of affairs is what ’ s behind a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of US children and adolescents may be one of the first generations to be less healthy and have shorter life expectancy than their parents.
” If you think atherosclerosis by age ten is bad , check out my video Heart Disease May Start in the Womb .
Adverse effects with cholesterol-lowering drugs ?
See Statin Muscle Toxicity .
I don ’ t think most people realize—doctors and patients alike—realize how relatively ineffective these drugs are .
Watch , for example , The Actual Benefit of Diet vs .
Drugs .
Cholesterol can do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ off our arteries .
In fact , Cholesterol Crystals May Tear Through Our Artery Lining .
What ’ s the Optimal Cholesterol Level ?
Does Cholesterol Size Matter ?
Watch the videos to find out .
Let ’ s take a step back , though .
What about all the “ cholesterol skeptics ” ?
Check out How Do We Know That Cholesterol Causes Heart Disease ?
.
PS : If you haven ’ t yet , you can subscribe to my free videos and watch my live presentations : • 2012 : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2013 : More Than an Apple a Day • 2014 : From Table to Able : Combating Disabling Diseases with Food • 2015 : Food as Medicine : Preventing and Treating the Most Dreaded Diseases with Diet • 2016 : How Not To Die : The Role of Diet in Preventing , Arresting , and Reversing Our Top 15 Killers

Coronary artery disease does not magically appear. The disease begins “during early childhood and progress[es] unrecognized for several decades to its often final and unexpected endpoint of chest pain, disability, or premature death.”
As I discuss in my video Should All Children Have Their Cholesterol Checked?, “we need to remind ourselves that atherosclerosis begins in childhood as fatty streaks” in the arteries, which “are the precursors of the advanced lesions that ultimately” kill us. By the time we’re in our 20s, 20 percent of the inner surface of the artery coming off the heart is covered in fatty streaks, as you can see at 0:58 in my video. Fifty years ago, pathologists began raising the question of whether heart disease is best handled by cardiologists or by pediatricians.
“By their 30s, many young adults already have advanced coronary atherosclerosis,” so, in reality, intervention during our 30s and beyond “is actually secondary prevention, because advanced atherosclerosis is likely already present.” Indeed, intervention is just trying to mediate the ravages of the disease rather than prevent the disease itself.
What’s more, we are exporting the problem around the world. A study of young, thin, apparently healthy individuals found 97 percent of their collected arteries had atherosclerosis, which you can see at 4:52 in my video. So, even in developing countries like Brazil, where they’ve acquired our eating habits, we’re seeing an epidemic of heart disease and sudden death.
“Moreover, the risk factors that correlate with the extent of such early lesions are the same risk factors that correlate with myocardial infarction [or, heart attacks] later in life.” In other words, it’s the same disease but in the early stages. So, pathologists, the ones doing the autopsies on all these young people and seeing all this coronary artery disease, “began urging many years ago that preventive measures should be instituted earlier in life.”
We’ve known that fatty streaks exist in young children for more than a century, but it wasn’t until 1994 that a task force convened by the government came up with a “radical” idea: “The strategic key, and the greatest opportunity in preventing [cardiovascular disease] CVD, is to prevent the development of CVD risk in the first place.”
In my video Heart Disease Starts in Childhood, I noted that fatty streaks, the first stage of atherosclerosis, were found in the arteries of nearly 100 percent of kids by age ten who were raised on the standard American diet. In recognition of this fact, the latest Academy of Pediatrics’ recommendation is for all kids to get their cholesterol tested starting between the ages of 9 and 11.
Of course, this has drug companies salivating at the thought of slipping statins into Happy Meals, but “long-term drug intervention is costly and may be associated with adverse effects.” So, the conversation is about lifestyle modification.
In my video How Many Meet the Simple Seven?, I revealed the breathtaking statistic that only about 1 in 2,000 U.S. adults met the seven American Heart Association criteria for a heart-healthy lifestyle. What about American teenagers? Of the 4,673 adolescents aged 12 to 19 who were studied, zero made the cut. Not one teen “exhibited ideal levels of all 7 cardiovascular health behaviors and health factors.”
Most teen boys and girls don’t smoke, and most aren’t overweight. What was the main sticking point? Almost no one ate a healthy diet. Indeed, less than 1 percent of young men and women met a minimum of healthy diet criteria.
This sorry state of affairs is what’s behind a “controversial valuation that the current generation of US children and adolescents may be one of the first generations to be less healthy and have shorter life expectancy than their parents.”


nutritionfactsorg--2020-02-18--What Not to Do When You Handle Receipts

What Not to Do When You Handle Receipts

The plastics chemical bisphenol A , commonly known as BPA , was banned for use in baby bottles in Canada in 2008 , in France in 2010 , in the European Union in 2011 , and in the United States in 2012 .
Then , in 2015 , France forbade the use of BPA in any food or beverage packaging , something the U.S. Food and Drug Administration had decided was not warranted .
But , what about the more than 90 studies “ reporting relationships between total BPA in [ people ’ s ] urine and a wide array @ @ @ @ @ @ @ significant increase in the likelihood of developing cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes , obesity , impaired liver function , impaired immune and kidney function , inflammation , reproductive effects in women… [ and ] in men… , altered thyroid hormone concentrations , and neurobehavioral deficits such as aggressiveness , hyperactivity , and impaired learning ” ?
Only a very small minority of studies appear to support the U.S. government ’ s assertions that there were no effects of BPA at low doses .
Where is the disconnect ?
Governmental regulatory agencies determine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ down into the stomachs of lab animals .
In these types of tests , BPA is released directly into the stomach , where it goes to the liver to be detoxified into an inactive form called BPA-glucuronide .
So , very little active BPA gets into the bloodstream .
But , that ’ s not what studies on humans show .
People have active BPA in their blood .
How did the FDA respond ?
By rejecting all such human studies as implausible .
The problem with a “ blanket rejection ” of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sources of BPA exposure that are not modeled by stomach tube exposure in rats .
After all , “ [ t ] his isn ’ t how food actually enters our bodies .
We chew it , move it around in our mouths…before it enters the stomach.
” It turns out “ that BPA can be completely absorbed directly into the bloodstream from the mouth , ” thus bypassing instant liver detoxification .
The same would be the case for BPA absorbed through the skin , which you can see at 2:08 in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Under Our Skin .
Thermal paper , often used for cash register receipts , luggage tags , and many bus , train , and lottery tickets , is 1 to 2 percent BPA by weight .
Taking hold of a receipt can transfer BPA to our fingers , especially if they ’ re wet or greasy .
Does the BPA then get absorbed into our system through the skin ?
Cashiers were found to have more BPA flowing through their bodies “ [ c ] ompared with other occupations , ” but that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Strict vegetarians had lower urinary BPA concentrations compared with nonvegetarians , ” but , once again , the sample size was too small to really make a conclusion .
It ’ s been estimated that even cashiers handling receipts all day may not exceed the “ tolerable daily intake ” of BPA—however , that could change if they were using something like hand cream .
Indeed , “ many skin-care products , including hand sanitizers , lotions , soaps and sunscreens , ” contain chemicals that enhance skin penetration .
So , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , before touching a receipt could cause a breakdown of the skin barrier .
What ’ s more , we now know that “ using hand sanitizer and handling a thermal receipt…prior to picking up and eating food with [ our ] hands ” results in high blood levels of active BPA .
Researchers at the University of Missouri , conducting a study to mimic aspects of the behavior of people in a fast-food restaurant found that when people handled a receipt right after using the hand sanitizer Purell , BPA was transferred @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was transferred from their fingers to their fries , and the combination of absorption through the skin and mouth led to significant levels of active BPA in their blood , as you can see at 3:45 in my video .
We can hold a receipt in our hand for 60 seconds and only come away with 3 micrograms of BPA in our body .
In contrast , if we pre-wet our hands with hand sanitizer , we can get 300 micrograms in just a few seconds—a hundred times more BPA , as you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ These findings show that a very large amount of BPA is transferred from thermal paper to a hand as a result of holding a thermal receipt for only a few seconds immediately after using a product with dermal penetration enhancing chemicals , ” like hand lotion .
This could explain why dozens of human studies show active BPA in people ’ s systems , contrary to the assumptions based on stomach tube studies in rodents .
When actual evidence contradicts your assumptions , you reject your assumptions .
The FDA , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Watch my video to learn Why BPA Hasn ’ t Been Banned .
For more on BPA , see : • How to Avoid the Obesity-Related Plastic Chemical BPA Interested in other examples of Food and Drug Administration failings ?
Check out : Phthalates are another class of concerning plastics compounds .
For more , see : PS : If you haven ’ t yet , you can subscribe to my free videos and watch my live presentations : • 2012 : Uprooting the Leading Causes of Death • 2013 : More Than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ From Table to Able : Combating Disabling Diseases with Food • 2015 : Food as Medicine : Preventing and Treating the Most Dreaded Diseases with Diet • 2016 : How Not To Die : The Role of Diet in Preventing , Arresting , and Reversing Our Top 15 Killers

The plastics chemical bisphenol A, commonly known as BPA, was banned for use in baby bottles in Canada in 2008, in France in 2010, in the European Union in 2011, and in the United States in 2012. Then, in 2015, France forbade the use of BPA in any food or beverage packaging, something the U.S. Food and Drug Administration had decided was not warranted. But, what about the more than 90 studies “reporting relationships between total BPA in [people’s] urine and a wide array of adverse health outcomes, including a significant increase in the likelihood of developing cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes, obesity, impaired liver function, impaired immune and kidney function, inflammation, reproductive effects in women…[and] in men…, altered thyroid hormone concentrations, and neurobehavioral deficits such as aggressiveness, hyperactivity, and impaired learning”?
Only a very small minority of studies appear to support the U.S. government’s assertions that there were no effects of BPA at low doses. Where is the disconnect? Governmental regulatory agencies determine safety levels of chemicals by sticking tubes down into the stomachs of lab animals. In these types of tests, BPA is released directly into the stomach, where it goes to the liver to be detoxified into an inactive form called BPA-glucuronide. So, very little active BPA gets into the bloodstream. But, that’s not what studies on humans show. People have active BPA in their blood. How did the FDA respond? By rejecting all such human studies as implausible.
The problem with a “blanket rejection” of human data is that there may be sources of BPA exposure that are not modeled by stomach tube exposure in rats. After all, “[t]his isn’t how food actually enters our bodies. We chew it, move it around in our mouths…before it enters the stomach.” It turns out “that BPA can be completely absorbed directly into the bloodstream from the mouth,” thus bypassing instant liver detoxification. The same would be the case for BPA absorbed through the skin, which you can see at 2:08 in my video BPA on Receipts: Getting Under Our Skin.
Thermal paper, often used for cash register receipts, luggage tags, and many bus, train, and lottery tickets, is 1 to 2 percent BPA by weight. Taking hold of a receipt can transfer BPA to our fingers, especially if they’re wet or greasy. Does the BPA then get absorbed into our system through the skin? Cashiers were found to have more BPA flowing through their bodies “[c]ompared with other occupations,” but that was based on only 17 people. “Strict vegetarians had lower urinary BPA concentrations compared with nonvegetarians,” but, once again, the sample size was too small to really make a conclusion. It’s been estimated that even cashiers handling receipts all day may not exceed the “tolerable daily intake” of BPA—however, that could change if they were using something like hand cream.
Indeed, “many skin-care products, including hand sanitizers, lotions, soaps and sunscreens,” contain chemicals that enhance skin penetration. So, using a hand sanitizer, for example, before touching a receipt could cause a breakdown of the skin barrier.
What’s more, we now know that “using hand sanitizer and handling a thermal receipt…prior to picking up and eating food with [our] hands” results in high blood levels of active BPA. Researchers at the University of Missouri, conducting a study to mimic aspects of the behavior of people in a fast-food restaurant found that when people handled a receipt right after using the hand sanitizer Purell, BPA was transferred to their fingers. Then, BPA was transferred from their fingers to their fries, and the combination of absorption through the skin and mouth led to significant levels of active BPA in their blood, as you can see at 3:45 in my video.
We can hold a receipt in our hand for 60 seconds and only come away with 3 micrograms of BPA in our body. In contrast, if we pre-wet our hands with hand sanitizer, we can get 300 micrograms in just a few seconds—a hundred times more BPA, as you can see at 4:05 in my video. “These findings show that a very large amount of BPA is transferred from thermal paper to a hand as a result of holding a thermal receipt for only a few seconds immediately after using a product with dermal penetration enhancing chemicals,” like hand lotion. This could explain why dozens of human studies show active BPA in people’s systems, contrary to the assumptions based on stomach tube studies in rodents.
When actual evidence contradicts your assumptions, you reject your assumptions. The FDA, however, rejected the evidence instead.
Watch my video to learn Why BPA Hasn’t Been Banned.
For more on BPA, see:
Interested in other examples of Food and Drug Administration failings? Check out:
Phthalates are another class of concerning plastics compounds. For more, see:
In health,
Michael Greger, M.D.


nutritionfactsorg--2020-02-13--Last day to register for next webinar!

Last day to register for next webinar!

Today is the last day to register for my upcoming webinar : Why Do Vegetarians Have Higher Stroke Risk ?
Date and Time : February 19 , 2-4pm ET Last Day to Register : February 13 , TODAY Given that high blood pressure and inadequate fruit and vegetable consumption are among the most important stroke risk factors , you would assume those eating plant-based diets would be at significantly lower risk , just as they are with heart attacks .
You might be surprised to learn that there had never been any studies on the incidence of stroke in vegetarians @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think that is surprising , wait until you hear the results .
Yes , they had lower heart disease risk as expected , but those eating meat-free diets appeared to have more stroke risk .
If that is indeed the case , what might be the cause , and what can we do about it ?
To see the list of topics I ’ ll cover , go here .
UPDATE : Get the download of this webinar here , and to be the first to see announcements of future webinars , be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The videos from my most recent webinar , What Triggered the Obesity Epidemic ?
, are now available for digital download here .
In fact , all of my previous webinars are available : Many of the videos from those webinars are already up on NutritionFacts.org , but if you ’ d like them all in one place , check out the downloads .
Note that these are just the videos from the webinars , and do not include the live Q & As .
I want to make sure everyone knows that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on new research .
The most up-to-date info can always be found on my Optimum Nutrition Recommendations page , but here they are for easy reference : • At least 2,000 mcg ( µg ) cyanocobalamin once each week , ideally as a chewable , sublingual , or liquid supplement taken on an empty stomach • or at least 50 mcg daily of supplemental cyanocobalamin ( you needn ’ t worry about taking too much ) • or servings of B12-fortified foods three times a day ( at each meal ) , each @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Daily Value listed on the nutrition facts label ( based on the new labeling mandated to start January 1 , 2020—the target is 4.5 mcg three times a day ) .
• Those over 65 years of age should take at least 1,000 mcg ( µg ) cyanocobalamin every day .
• Tip : If experiencing deficiency symptoms , the best test is probably urine MMA ( not serum B12 level ) I ’ ve got a series of new videos coming out explaining the changes that will be featured in an upcoming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ colleague , Dr. Neal Barnard , just released his new book .
Your Body in Balance on how foods affect our hormones and the simple dietary changes that can help .
This book provides step-by-step guidance on how specific foods can help with infertility , cramps , endometriosis , PCOS , hot flashes , and erectile dysfunction , as well as breast and prostate cancer through evidence-based dietary change .
It also discusses how foods affect our weight , mood , and overall health .
Learn more here .
• Facebook Live : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our Facebook page to watch live and ask questions .
• YouTube Live Stream : At 1:00 p.m .
ET go here to watch live and ask even more questions !
Thanks to the launch of How Not to Diet , I ’ ve been doing tons of interviews in between my speaking engagements ( including Rochester , MN , Savannah , and Lakeland , FL , to name just a few ) .
Check out this recent one on The Wellnest blog for an overview of what ’ s in the new @ @

Today is the last day to register for my upcoming webinar: Why Do Vegetarians Have Higher Stroke Risk?
Date and Time: February 19, 2-4pm ET
Last Day to Register: February 13, TODAY
Given that high blood pressure and inadequate fruit and vegetable consumption are among the most important stroke risk factors, you would assume those eating plant-based diets would be at significantly lower risk, just as they are with heart attacks. You might be surprised to learn that there had never been any studies on the incidence of stroke in vegetarians, though…until now. And if you think that is surprising, wait until you hear the results. Yes, they had lower heart disease risk as expected, but those eating meat-free diets appeared to have more stroke risk. If that is indeed the case, what might be the cause, and what can we do about it?
To see the list of topics I’ll cover, go here.
UPDATE: Get the download of this webinar here, and to be the first to see announcements of future webinars, be sure you subscribe to our newsletter.
Past Webinars Available
The videos from my most recent webinar, What Triggered the Obesity Epidemic?, are now available for digital download here.
In fact, all of my previous webinars are available:
Many of the videos from those webinars are already up on NutritionFacts.org, but if you’d like them all in one place, check out the downloads. Note that these are just the videos from the webinars, and do not include the live Q&As.
Seeking Spanish Volunteers Our Spanish team is looking for a few experienced translators to work on translating and editing transcripts, blog posts, and video subtitles. Applicants should be proficient in both Spanish and English, with previous translation experience and a basic understanding of NutritionFacts.org content and medical terms. Go here to apply.
New B12 Recommendations I want to make sure everyone knows that my B12 supplement recommendations have changed based on new research. The most up-to-date info can always be found on my Optimum Nutrition Recommendations page, but here they are for easy reference: At least 2,000 mcg (µg) cyanocobalamin once each week, ideally as a chewable, sublingual, or liquid supplement taken on an empty stomach or at least 50 mcg daily of supplemental cyanocobalamin (you needn’t worry about taking too much) or servings of B12-fortified foods three times a day (at each meal), each containing at least 190% of the Daily Value listed on the nutrition facts label (based on the new labeling mandated to start January 1, 2020—the target is 4.5 mcg three times a day).
Those over 65 years of age should take at least 1,000 mcg (µg) cyanocobalamin every day.
Tip: If experiencing deficiency symptoms, the best test is probably urine MMA (not serum B12 level) I’ve got a series of new videos coming out explaining the changes that will be featured in an upcoming webinar—stay tuned!
Dr. Barnard’s New Book My dear friend and colleague, Dr. Neal Barnard, just released his new book. Your Body in Balance on how foods affect our hormones and the simple dietary changes that can help. This book provides step-by-step guidance on how specific foods can help with infertility, cramps, endometriosis, PCOS, hot flashes, and erectile dysfunction, as well as breast and prostate cancer through evidence-based dietary change. It also discusses how foods affect our weight, mood, and overall health. Learn more here.
Live Q&As February 20
Feb 20 is the day. Every month now I do Q&As live from my treadmill, andis the day.
Facebook Live : At 12:00 p.m. ET go to our Facebook page to watch live and ask questions.
: At 12:00 p.m. ET go to our Facebook page to watch live and ask questions. YouTube Live Stream: At 1:00 p.m. ET go here to watch live and ask even more questions!
You can now find links to all of my past live YouTube and Facebook Q&As right here on NutritionFacts.org. If that’s not enough, remember I have an audio podcast to keep you company at http://nutritionfacts.org/audio.
Thanks to the launch of How Not to Diet, I’ve been doing tons of interviews in between my speaking engagements (including Rochester, MN, Savannah, and Lakeland, FL, to name just a few). Check out this recent one on The Wellnest blog for an overview of what’s in the new book!


nutritionfactsorg--2020-02-11--Consider the Evidence When You Make Life-or-Death Decisions

In the 1940s and ’ 50s , the American Medical Association was not only saying that “ smoking in moderation ” wasn ’ t a problem , but that , on balance , it may even be beneficial .
After all , most physicians themselves smoked , so how bad could it be ?
With such a position taken by one of the country ’ s leading medical groups , where could you turn if you just wanted the facts ?
According to one tobacco company ad , “ science advances new data that may completely change your idea of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new data tell us ?
“ She was too tired for fun…and then she smoked a Camel.
” ( You can see the unbelievable ads in my video Evidence-Based Eating , starting at 0:29 ) .
In another ad , baseball legend Babe Ruth told us , “ Now !
Medical science offers proof positive !
” that the brand he was hawking is the safest to smoke of all the leading cigarettes—well , he told us , that is , when he still could talk , before he died of throat cancer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ evidence did leak out , causing a dip from an average of 11 or so cigarettes a day per person down to 10 , as you can see at 0:50 in my video , but those who got scared of possible health risks from smoking could always choose “ [ t ] he cigarette that takes the FEAR out of smoking !
” Even better , why not choose the cigarette that “ gives you the greatest health protection ?
” Had a SmokingFacts.org website existed during the time of these outrageous ads @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the science directly to the people , bypassing commercially corruptible institutional filters—it would have featured a study of Seventh-day Adventists in California in 1958 that showed that nonsmokers may have at least 90 percent less lung cancer than smokers .
With so much money and personal habit at stake , there will always be “ dissenters.
” Given the seriousness of these diseases and the sum total of evidence , though , we shouldn ’ t wait to put preventive measures in place .
If you ’ re a smoker in the 1950s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ science-based realities of smoking , you realize the best available balance of evidence suggests your smoking habit is probably not good for you .
So , what do you do ?
Do you change your smoking habits , or do you wait ?
If you wait until your physician tells you—between puffs—to quit , you could have cancer by then .
If you wait until the powers that be officially recognize it , like the Surgeon General did in the subsequent decade , you could be dead by then .
It took more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ countless smokers before the first Surgeon General report against smoking was finally released in the 1960s .
Wouldn ’ t you think that after the first 6,000 studies or so , they could have given people a heads up ?
One wonders how many people are suffering needlessly right now from dietary diseases .
Let ’ s fast-forward 55 years to a new Adventist study out of California warning Americans about the risks of something else they may be putting in their mouths : “ Vegetarian diets are associated with lower all-cause mortality.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ study either .
According to a recent review , a total sum of evidence suggests that mortality from all causes put together , including many of our dreaded diseases were significantly lower in those eating more plant-based diets .
As well , “ [ c ] ompared with omnivores , the incidence of cancer and type 2 diabetes was also significantly lower in vegetarians.
” So , instead of someone going along with America ’ s smoking habits in the 1950s , imagine you or someone you know is going along with America @ @ @ @ @ @ @ access to the science , you realize the best available balance of evidence suggests your eating habits are probably not good for you .
So , what do you do ?
Do you change your eating habits , or do you wait ?
If you wait until your doctor tells you—between bites—to change your diet , it could be too late .
Just like most doctors smoked back then and didn ’ t tell their patients to change , despite the overwhelming evidence published for decades , most doctors today continue to eat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of dietary disease .
For more on this topic , check out my series of videos on parallels to smoking and the tobacco industry ’ s tactics , including : • How Smoking in 1959 Is Like Eating in 2019 PS : If you haven ’ t yet , you can subscribe to my free videos and watch my live presentations : • 2012 : Uprooting the Leading Causes of Death • 2013 : More Than an Apple a Day • 2014 : From Table to Able : Combating Disabling Diseases with Food @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Preventing and Treating the Most Dreaded Diseases with Diet • 2016 : How Not To Die : The Role of Diet in Preventing , Arresting , and Reversing Our Top 15 Killers

In the 1940s and ’50s, the American Medical Association was not only saying that “smoking in moderation” wasn’t a problem, but that, on balance, it may even be beneficial. After all, most physicians themselves smoked, so how bad could it be? With such a position taken by one of the country’s leading medical groups, where could you turn if you just wanted the facts?
According to one tobacco company ad, “science advances new data that may completely change your idea of cigarettes!” And what might those new data tell us? “She was too tired for fun…and then she smoked a Camel.” (You can see the unbelievable ads in my video Evidence-Based Eating, starting at 0:29). In another ad, baseball legend Babe Ruth told us, “Now! Medical science offers proof positive!” that the brand he was hawking is the safest to smoke of all the leading cigarettes—well, he told us, that is, when he still could talk, before he died of throat cancer.
Now, some of the science-based evidence did leak out, causing a dip from an average of 11 or so cigarettes a day per person down to 10, as you can see at 0:50 in my video, but those who got scared of possible health risks from smoking could always choose “[t]he cigarette that takes the FEAR out of smoking!” Even better, why not choose the cigarette that “gives you the greatest health protection?”
Had a SmokingFacts.org website existed during the time of these outrageous ads making such outrageous claims—a site that delivered the science directly to the people, bypassing commercially corruptible institutional filters—it would have featured a study of Seventh-day Adventists in California in 1958 that showed that nonsmokers may have at least 90 percent less lung cancer than smokers. With so much money and personal habit at stake, there will always be “dissenters.” Given the seriousness of these diseases and the sum total of evidence, though, we shouldn’t wait to put preventive measures in place.
If you’re a smoker in the 1950s in the know and privy to the science-based realities of smoking, you realize the best available balance of evidence suggests your smoking habit is probably not good for you. So, what do you do? Do you change your smoking habits, or do you wait? If you wait until your physician tells you—between puffs—to quit, you could have cancer by then. If you wait until the powers that be officially recognize it, like the Surgeon General did in the subsequent decade, you could be dead by then.
It took more than 7,000 studies and the deaths of countless smokers before the first Surgeon General report against smoking was finally released in the 1960s. Wouldn’t you think that after the first 6,000 studies or so, they could have given people a heads up? One wonders how many people are suffering needlessly right now from dietary diseases.
Let’s fast-forward 55 years to a new Adventist study out of California warning Americans about the risks of something else they may be putting in their mouths: “Vegetarian diets are associated with lower all-cause mortality.” It’s not just one study either. According to a recent review, a total sum of evidence suggests that mortality from all causes put together, including many of our dreaded diseases were significantly lower in those eating more plant-based diets. As well, “[c]ompared with omnivores, the incidence of cancer and type 2 diabetes was also significantly lower in vegetarians.”
So, instead of someone going along with America’s smoking habits in the 1950s, imagine you or someone you know is going along with America’s eating habits today. With access to the science, you realize the best available balance of evidence suggests your eating habits are probably not good for you. So, what do you do? Do you change your eating habits, or do you wait? If you wait until your doctor tells you—between bites—to change your diet, it could be too late.
Just like most doctors smoked back then and didn’t tell their patients to change, despite the overwhelming evidence published for decades, most doctors today continue to eat foods that are contributing to our epidemics of dietary disease.
For more on this topic, check out my series of videos on parallels to smoking and the tobacco industry’s tactics, including:
In health,
Michael Greger, M.D.