HealthBeat News

Category: Health Questions

  • The Rooster Crows To Make The Sun Rise

    The Problem With Research Article Abstracts – Or, How The Rooster Crows To Make The Sun Rise…

     

    By Nurse Mark

     

    Our patients tend to be a well-informed and intelligent group – naturally, they chose Dr. Myatt for their physician! This is a good thing most of the time – but sometimes our patients cause themselves needless worry and alarm when they get out into the great, big, wild, wooly, and unchecked World Wide Web. Newsgroups, support groups, “infomercial” websites, self-appointed “experts” – all clamoring for attention. It can be a confusing, even misleading place out there, much like a carnival midway sometimes: “Hurry, Hurry, Hurry! Step Right Up And Get Your Cure! Today Only Folks – Just For You…”

    This question was sent to us by one of our patients, a noted Scientist and a quite brilliant fellow who more than six years ago was told by his conventional doctor to tidy up his affairs as he had weeks, perhaps months at best to live. We are thrilled that he is not only still “with us” but that he is fit and healthy and confounding his conventional doctor.

    He is also, like many prostate cancer patients, keenly interested in his condition and deeply determined to learn as much as possible about it. And therein lies the problem.

    Read on…

    Dear Dr Myatt,

    I hope you have had a very pleasant weekend.

    As you know, I have been making a Supershake every morning for breakfast and one of its ingredients is Flaxseed Oil.

    I also receive many emails from well informed sources, who are members of a special interest group focused on PCa. (Prostate Cancer) This surfaced the paper below and the associated comment.

    You will appreciate that this gives me some concern about the flaxseed oil, which is stated to comprise mainly the alpha-linolenic acid.

    Can you provide some published material to rebutt the proposition that this is “bad for PCa”?

    Many thanks

    This patient goes on to provide us with this link to a Journal article:

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/utils/fref.fcgi?PrId=3058&itool=AbstractPlus-def&uid=17450530&db=pubmed&url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ijc.22788
    from the International Journal of Cancer and quotes the information that was sent to him, highlighting in red selected portions of the text: [edited for brevity – see full abstract at URL above]

    Risk factors for prostate cancer incidence and progression in the health professionals follow-up study.
    […] for fatal prostate cancer, recent smoking history, taller height, higher BMI, family history, and high intakes of total energy, calcium and alpha-linolenic acid were associated with a statistically significant increased risk. […] Tomato sauce (inversely) and alpha-linolenic acid (positively) intakes were strong predictors of advanced cancer among those with low-grade cancers at diagnosis[…]

    An associated comment (presumably of the person from the support group who found and forwarded this information)

    “It’s the alpha linolenic acid that is the ALA that is not good for prostate cancer. Alpha lipoic is OK.“

    Interestingly, this abstract does contain a gem of information that appears to have been under-appreciated:

    […] The complexity of the clinical and pathologic manifestations of prostate cancer must be considered in the design and interpretation of studies.

    Wow – How Very True!

    Dr. Myatt responded to this fellow with the story below:

    Once upon a time, a man decided to do research to find out what makes the sun rise in the morning.

    Every day, a half hour before sunrise, he dutifully awakened and sat outside in a lawn chair, recording his observations.

    Every day for that entire year, whether it was cloudy or clear, he heard a rooster crow in the distance. Sometimes ten minutes before the sun came up, and other times five minutes before the sun came up, but the rooster always crowed.

    After a year of observation, the man was confident that he had solved the mystery of sunrise. He published a scientific paper titled “Sound Correlates to Sunrise: What Makes the Sun Come Up?” The abstract (a pseudo-scientific term for “article summary”) said something about “cock’s crowing unequivocally associated with first light of dawn.”

    The article title and abstract were quoted in numerous internet forums. The media picked up on the article, and headlines read “Rooster’s Crowing Responsible for Sunrise.” Because the article had been published in a scientific journal — The Journal of Improbable Results —- everyone knew that the information must be trustworthy.

    People started to panic. What if something happened to the Rooster? Would the sun stop rising every morning? Was it a special rooster, or perhaps a particular breed of rooster, that caused sunrise? Should the rooster be a protected species? Would we experience another ice age if anything happened to the rooster? Or worse, would life as we know it cease to exist without the rooster bringing the sun up each day?

    The stock market fluctuated drastically as a result of this report. New companies were formed to develop alternate technologies in case the sun failed to rise. Cryonic research was started to preserve the rooster should anything happen to him. And many people lived in fear of the worst, which seemed reasonable in view of these new findings.

    Of course, very few people actually read the research paper itself. Why bother when the abstract clearly stated that “cock’s crowing unequivocally associated with first light of dawn”?  Besides, scientific journal articles are usually only accessible through a paid subscription to the journal, or at least a pay-per-view of the article.

    Several people did actually read the full article, but they had no background in improbable results research and so didn’t understand what they were reading.

    One specialist read the article and began to laugh uncontrollably, for it was clear to her that the entire panic was unwarranted. First, the study was “observational,” not interventional. Just because the rooster crows before sunup doesn’t “prove” that the crowing causes sunup. And she found that no studies had been done (or even planned), to silence the rooster and see if the sun would come up without his help.

    Although she tried to explain to her worried constituents that the reports of the study were far over-blown and not necessarily accurate, the mass hysteria created by headlines and “abstracts” was too great, and most people chose to remain in a state of panic and confusion rather than systematically evaluate the evidence.

    And so it is with the headline and abstract you forwarded to me she continued…

    First, do you suppose that the person who posted this abstract read the article? Seeing as how the abstract is “ahead of print” and the article is a “pay-per-view,” I’m betting NOT. Further, unless one knows how to read and interpret medical science (not just any science), they still might not know what they were looking at.

    Do you suppose the person posting this article even knows what study the “conclusion” is drawn from, or if it is a viable conclusion? Again, I’d bet money that this is not the case.

    The study from which this sweeping statement is drawn is called the “Health Professionals Follow-Up Study,” a project that has been going on since 1986. Over 50,000 male medical professionals (doctors, dentists, veterinarians) have been receiving surveys for the past 20+ years, and that’s the study. Like the “rooster and sunrise study,” it is an observational study only. Individuals and groups seeking grants related to this study must continue to “make something” of the results in order to continue receiving funding. There’s always a “rooster article” to be found in any set of data!

    Now, here’s the “inside scoop” (the one few bother to look into before they post an abstract on a forum, or read an abstract and get their knickers in a knot about a single sentence of illogically-drawn “conclusion”…)

    So what is the True story about ALA’s and Prostate Cancer?

    ALA’s and flax seed oil are being declared guilty by being at the crime scene, rather than actually being the criminal. (Sort of like saying that white blood cells cause infection because you almost always find them at sites of infection; or saying that flies cause garbage because…)

    To fully understand this, let’s use both common sense AND biochemistry (both of which I find often lacking when someone posts an “abstract” with one sentence highlighted on a forum….)

    First, the Common Sense (Oh, NO! NOT common sense! Don’t make me go there!)

    For all but the most recent of human existence, we have eaten foods with an omega-6 fatty acid (linoleic acid and arachidonic acid) to omega-3 fatty acid (DHA, EPA, and alpha-linolenic acid) of about 1:1 to 2:1. Over the last 50 years, however, that ratio has changed to 20:1 or even 30:1 and in some cases as high as 50:1.

    Modern diets now include HUGE amounts of highly refined Omega-6 oils extracted from plants (corn oil, safflower oil, cottonseed oil, peanut oil, and soybean oil) and used for cooking. These oils are all high in the omega-6s fatty acids but also contain some amount of O-3 fatty acids. At the same time, we have dramatically decreased our intake of omega-3 fatty acids (found primarily in whole grains, beans, seeds, and seafood). The Omega-3’s we DO eat are typically “secondary” to the omega-6’s in food, and are cooked or highly refined.

    Biochemical side-note: Omega 3’s and Omega 6’s (polyunsaturated oils) are dramatically altered when heated. THEY ARE NOT THE SAME SPECIES of oil once they are heated, and their health benefits literally evaporate with cooking. SO… talking about Essential Fatty Acids is really an incomplete discussion without addressing whether or not the oils are the “parent oils” (unheated) or whether they are damaged EFA’s. But I digress with science… back to common sense…

    In this same 50-year period that our intake of parent EFA’s (both O-6 and O-3, but especially O-3) has dramatically decreased, the rates of prostate cancer have soared. (The incidence of prostate cancer in Uruguay, one of the more frequently-referenced “ALA’s are associated with prostate cancer” studies, has increased nearly 80% in the past 50 years. It should be noted that the diet in Uruguay is largely comprised of meat (a major dietary source of ALA), dairy,  a lot of food fried in refined cooking oils such as canola (a major dietary source of ALA, and remember that heating ALA makes it an entirely different “beast”)  and virtually no flaxseed or unheated cold-processed flax oil.

    Common sense would tell us that we’ve been doing something wrong over the last 50, especially in regard to prostate cancer. Here are some things that have changed in our oil consumption:

    1.) We get most of our Omega-3 fatty acids from foods that are quite high in Omega-6 fatty acids, thereby altering the 1:1 or at most 2:1 ration of O-6 to O-3 that used to comprise a “natural diet. As a result, yes, we’re getting more O-3 (especially ALA) but a LOT MORE O-6. It is important to understand that all fat-containing foods have a variety of different types of fats, not just one type. For example, Canola oil is considered a high Omega-3 fat, but it actually contains omega 3s, 6s, and 9s. Meat contains both saturated fats and also unsaturated omega-6s and 3s.

    2.) Most of the Essential Fatty Acids (both O-6 and O-3) that are consumed today have been heated or chemically extracted. These polyunsaturated oils are quite fragile, and heating and refining them makes them a completely different “species” of oil. If we are not consuming “parent” (undamaged) EFA’s, then we are comparing apples to oranges.

    3.) Refining oils removes many of the associated nutrients (phytochemicals) and fiber. Remember that I originally advised you to use ground flax seed meal instead of flax oil, or second best, high lignan flax oil. Lignans are a special class of fiber with potent anti-cancer properties.

    4.) Vegetable oils (even ones that are uncooked) go rancid quickly. Again, a rancid EFA is an entirely different “species” than an undamaged “parent” EFA.

    Ah, but listen to the untutored who take every sentence from a “scientific study” (to use the term loosely) and you’d think that eating raw, natural O-3 ALA’s in the form of flaxseed was single-handedly responsible for the rise in prostate cancer. What a serious perversion of the truth!

    Next, Let’s Look at the Medical Science

    In spite of a few spurious “rooster and sunrise” studies to the contrary, the vast majority of scientific studies show a positive outcome using flaxseed and Omega-3 parent oils in cancer patients.

    A Duke University Medical Center study found that flaxseed and a low-fat diet helped men reduce the risk of prostate cancer (1, 2). The conclusions of the study were that even short-term changes to a high-fiber/flax supplemented diet resulted in prostate cancer cells that didn’t divide as quickly as those in people not on the diet. “I really didn’t think we’d have results like we did, because this was a diet and not drug intervention,” said Wendy Demark-Wahnefried, associate research professor in the department of surgery at Duke.

    A Kaiser Permanente study concluded that it was not total fat intake per se which relates to prostate and colon cancer but instead the type of fat, plus increasing exercise, that was associated with lower cancer risk. The “type of fats” recommended are from uncooked plant sources (which would be “parent” O-6’s and O-3’s). The American Cancer Society guidelines concur with these recommendations (3).

    A Korean study found that the ratios of serum O-3 to O-6 were highly correlated with prostate cancer. Men with prostate cancer also had significantly higher levels of O-6 acids than did men with BPH and those with normal prostates. The researchers concluded that omega-6 polyunsaturated fatty acids have a tumor-promoting effect while omega-3 acids have a protective effect. (4).

    And While We’re On The Subject of Biochemistry….

    The Fate of ALA in the body is that it is converted to DHA and EPA, two forms of fat which have a HIGH correlation with protection from cancer. Aye, but here’s the rub:

    O-6 and O-3 (and O-9, for that matter) all use the same delta-6-desaturase enzyme for their conversion. When O-6 levels are high, O-3 is not so readily converted to DHA and EPA. Since DHA and EPA are protective substances, high O-6 can interfere with conversion. (A probable mechanism whereby high O-6 levels increase cancer proliferation, by interfering with the body’s use of protective O-3).

    Trans fats, high insulin levels and damaged polyunsaturated oils all interfere with the desaturase enzyme.

    And Now the Particular Study That This “Rooster Crowing Causes Sunrise” Abstract Was Taken From…

    The “Health Professionals Follow-Up Study” has been ongoing since 1986. A group of 50,000+ male health professionals (doctors, dentists, veterinarians, etc.) have been sent questionnaires every two years since 1986. That makes this “study” an observational one (like getting up to watch the sun rise), not an intervention study. As we discussed, finding white blood cells at the site of an infection is not proof that WBC’s cause infection (we know they don’t, but instead are attempting to “clean up” infection). The rooster crowing before sunrise does not prove that His Nibs’ noise brings the sun up, either.

    There is NO PLACE in the Men’s Healthy Study questionnaire that asks about specific foods that contain largely ALA, or ALA supplements or flaxseed. You can view the actual questionnaire here: http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hpfs/pdfs/04L.pdf

    If you want to see the food and supplement questions they have asked about over the years (the form is sent every two years), access it here:  http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hpfs/hpfs_qx_diet.html

    Higher levels of ALA as ascertained in this study are from meats (a specific question on the form), especially fried meats. This, of course, also increases intake of O-6. And remember, a cooked polyunsaturate bears no resemblance to a “parent” EFA, questions which aren’t touched on in this study.

    The Bottom Line (and Many Medical Scientists Concur)

    If you look at all of the evidence, both historical and scientific, (plus use some common sense) there is not one shred of “proof” that “parent” Omega-3 fatty acids as derived from flax seed and flax oil contribute to increased prostate cancer risk. In fact, just the opposite is true. The real risk is from highly processed vegetable oils (yes, containing ALA), that bear little resemblance to parent Omega-3 oils (native ALA’s).

    Not only do these heat and chemically-processed ALA’s bear no resemblance to parent ALA’s, they do not help to improve the highly imbalanced O-6:O-3 ratios characteristic of our “evolved” diets.

    But isn’t it better to be safe than sorry and avoid ALA’s? I don’t believe so. As I mentioned earlier, that would be like blaming white blood cells (WBC’s) for infections, and seeking to eliminate them instead of (or in addition to) the offending bacterium. Blaming the white blood cells and then trying to get rid of them — “Maybe it’s true and maybe it’s not, but just to be on the “safe side” we should get rid of the WBC’s at the site of an infection,” is NOT a benign mistake.

    The big problem with “warnings” about flax and flax oil is that they condemn a valuable component of cancer prevention and treatment based on faulty information and also let the real killers (highly refined O-3’s and O-6’s plus an imbalanced O-3:O-6 ratio) go Scott-free.

    If you’re concerned about flax oil, you can always rely solely on fish oil for your DHA and EPA’s. However, you’ll be missing out on the cancer-protective lignans (a type of fiber that is difficult to obtain in sufficient quantities outside of flax seed).

    In Health,
    Dr. Myatt

     

    References

    1.) Pilot study of dietary fat restriction and flaxseed supplementation in men with prostate cancer before surgery: exploring the effects on hormonal levels, prostate-specific antigen, and histopathologic features. Urology. 2001 Jul;58(1):47-52.
    2.) Pilot study to explore effects of low-fat, flaxseed-supplemented diet on proliferation of benign prostatic epithelium and prostate-specific antigen. Urology. 2004 May;63(5):900-4.
    3.) Dietary fat and cancer.Am J Med. 2002 Dec 30;113 Suppl 9B:63S-70S
    4.) Comparison of fatty acid profiles in the serum of patients with prostate cancer and benign prostatic hyperplasia. Clinical Biochemistry, Vol. 32, August 1999, pp. 405-09.

  • Asthma, Allergies, Loss Of Taste And Smell – What To Do?

    A Reader Question answered by Nurse Mark

     

    We all remember the old children’s ditty “Dry Bones” which tells us that (for example) “the shin bone’s connected to the knee bone, the knee bone’s connected to the thigh bone…” and so on. It teaches us a valuable lesson, in that everything in our body is connected somehow to everything else. When one part becomes sick, all parts are weakened. When we nourish an strengthen some area of our bodies, our whole being benefits.

    And so it is with the symptoms / conditions that this reader asks us about:

    What would you recommend taking for asthma, allergies, and loss of taste and smell?  We’ve ordered the Multi vitamin.  Thank you. 

     

    Here is my answer to our reader:

     

    Thank you for your question. You have made a good start by using an Optimal Dose Daily Multiple Vitamin like Maxi Multi.

    The symptoms you describe may indeed be inter-related, but can be symptoms of several different problems – so more information would be needed to offer firm recommendations.

    However, here are some preliminary thoughts for you:

    Asthma often responds quickly and dramatically to Grape Seed Extract and other pycnogenol-containing supplements such as Maxi Greens.  High-potency fish oil has also been found to be beneficial. You can read more about asthma here.

    Allergies and asthma often go together, and “allergies” respond well to the same supplements – High-potency fish oil, Grape Seed Extract, and other pycnogenols.

    Allergies are also often related to digestive deficiencies and allergy symptoms and can almost always be lessened by improving digestion. Gastric Acid Function Self Testing and Food Allergy Testing are good places to start. Supplementing Betaine HCl and /or digestive enzymes can be very helpful.

    Loss of taste and smell can be related to a zinc deficiency. Optimal daily amounts of Zinc are easily obtained from Dr. Myatt’s Maxi Multi – your comprehensive multiple vitamin and mineral nutrient formula.

    Be very careful if you decide to supplement zinc in addition to that contained in your Maxi Multi as Large doses (more than 50mg/day) can cause a copper deficiency & other mineral imbalances. Copper should be supplemented when using zinc in high doses.

    You may wish to ask Dr. Myatt about a simple screening method for evaluating zinc status. She is able to provide this in-home screening test for zinc status on a special order basis.

    As you can see, this is a lot of recommendation – and that is because while these look at first blush to be simple conditions that should respond to simple supplementation, they are all inter-related and sorting out the best plan of action (instead of shooting in the dark) can take some careful consideration and research so that you are addressing these problems as effectively and efficiently as possible.

    I would highly recommend that you invest $60 in a Brief Telephone Consultation since that 20 minutes you spend speaking with Dr. Myatt will give you a very clear idea of your options and possible strategies for improving your health, and helping you to know what you do and what you don’t need for supplements.

    Most people find that Dr. Myatt’s recommendations can save them a lot of time and money by helping them cut through the clutter of conflicting advice that is available on the internet and from well-meaning friends!

    Hope this helps…

    Cheers,
    Nurse Mark

    Now, just for fun, here is a very nicely done video of that delightful old children’s ditty “Dry Bones” – enjoy!

  • Chemicals That Kill? Or Just Frighten?

    By Nurse Mark

     

    The human organism is a wild and wonderful place – we are a chemical soup of minerals, acids, electrolytes, proteins, and fats. (well, proteins and fats are acids…) This does lead to a whole lot of confusion though, and sometimes outright deception by those who would have us believe that such-and-such spooky-sounding chemical must be bad for us…

    Here is a case in point:

    Dave wrote:

    I have a nephew who is a chemical engineer and he tells me Aspartame, when warmed up equals formaldehyde. Ill bet that’s as safe as all the other garbage the AMA says we need. I’m still wondering what good nicotinic acid does for me. That’s what niacin is isn’t it?

    Dave knows correctly that formaldehyde, which is a breakdown product of Aspartame the artificial sweetener, is not very good for us – after all, it is used to preserve cadavers, right? (see our HealthBeat Article Is Nutrasweet (Aspartame) Safe?)

    Yes Dave, Aspartame is a spooky chemical and your nephew is right. Formaldehyde, while it does occur naturally in very minute amounts in the human body, is not something we want to ingest.

    This is much the same situation as the sodium benzoate and citric acid or ascorbic acid combo that is present in so many soft drinks – and can break down into benzene, a known and potent carcinogen. Yet another well-meant chemical offering with unintended and poisonous consequences.

    But that leaves us with the $64,000 question: which “chemicals” are good for us, and which are not?

    Here is a “Pop Quiz”:

    Which of the following chemicals are unsafe for humans?

    • Strontium
    • Deoxyribonucleic acid
    • Boron
    • Muriatic acid
    • Selenium
    • Cyanocobalamin
    • Ascorbic acid
    • Dihydrogen Monoxide

     

    How did you do? Let’s look at each of these ominous-sounding chemicals:

    • Strontium – Safe or Not? Answer: Safe
      No, not the radioactive fallout stuff, this trace mineral is essential to strong, healthy bones. Read more about why we need strontium here.
    • Deoxyribonucleic acid – Safe or Not? Answer: Safe
      Actually, this rather ominous sounding chemical is essential for life as we know it – it is the fancy name for what we all know as DNA. It contains the genetic instructions used in the development and functioning of all known living organisms, including us. We all begin as a little bit of DNA – the twinkle in our parents eyes perhaps…
    • Boron – Safe or Not? Answer: Safe
      Another trace element vital to good bone health and the prevention of osteoporosis. Boron is an important part of Dr. Myatt’s Cal-Mag Amino – find out more here.
    • Muriatic Acid – Safe or Not? Answer: Safe
      “Now wait just a minute” you’re saying, “That stuff is nasty – it will burn you!” Yep, you’re right – it is nasty stuff – but it is also essential to your ability to digest food. Also known as hydrochloric acid, it is produced naturally by a healthy stomach, and a deficiency of this important chemical can lead to all sorts of problems. Learn More about gastric acid and digestive health here.
    • Selenium – Safe or Not? Answer: Safe
      Selenium is another trace element that we need in just the right amount – too much and it can be toxic, too little and we become deficient and unhealthy. Learn why selenium is so important here.
    • Selenomethionine – Safe or Not? Answer: Safe
      Selenomethionine is an organic form of selenium and is easier for the human body to absorb than selenite, which is an inorganic form.
    • Cyanocobalamin – Safe or Not? Answer: Safe
      Despite the ominous name sounding like something to do with cyanide, this is a chemical name for vitamin B12 – even the FDA says we must have adequate intakes of this important vitamin to keep healthy. Read up about B12 the essential energy vitamin here.
    • Ascorbic acid – Safe or Not? Answer: Safe
      That one was easy, right? Just another name for vitamin C, and a name that we all recognize. Did you know that it is used as a food additive to prevent oxidation, and it is also used in the making of plastics? Vitamin C is essential for health – find out why here.
    • Dihydrogen Monoxide
      Normally colorless, odorless, and tasteless, DHMO can be dangerous. Also known as hydroxyl acid, it is a major chemical of industry. It is responsible for numerous deaths every year, and children are especially at risk from it’s dangers. It is used by industry in it’s solid, liquid, and gaseous forms – and all can cause tissue damage. It is used as a solvent and a coolant and is used extensively in the nuclear industry. It is also used as a fire retardant.
      So, is this chemical Safe or Not? Answer: You decide – it’s more commonly called water.
    • Here’s a fun little video by comedians Penn and Teller showing how people can be bamboozled into doing silly things by being frightened with scary sounding terminology.

    Like many things, these and a lot of other nasty sounding chemicals have some very important uses and functions within our bodies. As with most things, they need to be in the right place at the right time and in the right amount in order to be beneficial rather than harmful.

    So, pyridine-3-carboxylic acid, AKA nicotinic acid, AKA Niacin, AKA vitamin B3 is the only substance (dare we say “drug”?) that has been proven to reduce mortality from elevated cholesterol levels. It also improves microcirculation. Read about how the Coronary Drug Project found that niacin was the only “drug” that actually reduced mortality.

    Not bad for a spooky-sounding chemical, right?

    And these other scary-sounding chemicals? As Penn and Teller demonstrate in their video, unscrupulous people can prey on the fears of others by using language emotionally loaded with frightening terminology to achieve their own ends.

    Whether that is to persuade folks to sign a petition to ban water, or, as has been happening recently in the nutrition industry where certain marketers are offering sales-pitches that rely on generating fear about “dangerous chemicals” in competitors products in order to sell their own.

    One such recent sales tactic whips up fear about a substance called magnesium stearate – and Dr. Myatt addressed that deception in a HealthBeat video that you can watch – check out Dr. Myatt’s HealthBeat News article and video debunking Dr. Mercola and his treatment of magnesium stearate here!

  • Ubiquinone, Ubiquinol, CoQ10: What’s Real, What’s Not.

    CoQ10 – Fact, Fiction, Hype, And Hocus-Pocus.

     

    By Nurse Mark

     

    I was speaking with a regular HealthBeat reader and WellnessClub member the other day, and she asked if I had seen an emailed article recently sent out by a group called “Off The Grid News” that purported to describe “A Dirty Secret About CoQ10.” She was understandably concerned about some of the claims and assertions made in the article. While I am familiar with the blog, having followed their often very good writings for several years, I had not seen this most recent post – but I promised I would look into it.

    I didn’t have to look hard to find the email she referred to – and some things about it jumped out at me immediately.

    First, it was not an article by Off The Grid News. In smaller print above the big, bold headline proclaiming status as a “Special Report” was this disclaimer: “Off The Grid News occasionally sends emails like this one to introduce major advertisers to our loyal readers and valued customers.”

    So, this isn’t a true “news” article, it is a paid advertisement by a “major advertiser” – a company wanting to sell you something.

    The advertisement, known in the ad industry as a “long-copy sales piece,” contains plenty of impressive-sounding information. Unfortunately, much of it falls into the half-truth and hype categories. There is however enough truth mixed in to make everything seem quite plausible and believable. It was well-written sales copy!

    The ad starts by proclaiming that most doctors are unaware of the effects of CoQ10 deficiency (that may be so, though research into CoQ10 has been ongoing since it’s discovery over 50 years ago) and that Big Pharma is actively suppressing research on it.

    Now, Big Pharma may be doing many bad things, but suppressing research on CoQ10 is not one of them.

    In fact, when the first statin drugs were being tested in the 1980’s the pharmaceutical companies recognized that these drugs depleted CoQ10 levels, and combination drug that would combine a statin with CoQ10 was considered. This were turned down by the FDA and has not been offered since then because doing so now would be to admit there is a problem with statin drugs.

    There are plenty of major studies both published and ongoing into the use and benefit of CoQ10 – and Big Pharma is actually involved in some of them. Big Pharma would love to figure out a new way to synthesize the stuff!

    The ad goes on to say that CoQ10 “fuels your heart.” This one falls into the “half-truth” category. CoQ10 is involved in the metabolism and energy production of every cell in your body – that’s true. But it is not a “fuel” – it is a necessary player in the complex cellular process that allows your cells to use their fuel – which is either glucose or ketones.

    The ad goes on to make much about “natural” versus “synthetic” CoQ10, telling us that we must use only the “trans-form” of CoQ10, and also that we must ensure that it was made using “yeast fermentation” because this is “the most effective form.”

    This, again, is in the “mostly, partly true” category.

    The ad then goes on to tell us why their brand of CoQ10 is the best because it meets all these requirements, is used by folks just like you (just read the testimonials!), is guaranteed to be wonderful, is really, really affordable, and it will make you feel younger and healthier than ever before.

    Well, here is a very brief summary of what you need to know about CoQ10 so you can make an informed decision when you are shopping:

    • CoQ10 was discovered in 1957. It is also known as “Ubiquinone.”
    • In the mid 1970’s, a Japanese chemical company perfected industrial fermentation technology to produce pure CoQ10 in commercial quantities. This is known now as the “yeast fermentation” process and produces “trans,” or “natural” CoQ10.
    • Until recently, almost all available CoQ10 was produced by this one Japanese company. There is now a manufacturing plant in the USA producing CoQ10 – it belongs to this same Japanese company, the Kaneka Corp.
    • Japanese industrial giants Nissin, Asahi and Mitsubishi are also known to produce commercial quantities of high-quality CoQ10.
    • The “reduced” form of Ubiquinone is called “Ubiquinol.” The body converts these substances back and forth in a cyclic manner as they each perform their specific functions in cellular metabolism.
    • The CoQ10 form Ubiquinol tends to be unstable. Recent advances have allowed a more stable form of Ubiquinol to be made available and it is being marketed heavily as being “New” and “More Bio-Absorbable.”
    • There is another form of CoQ10 that is produced from tobacco stems and potato leaves and is considered to be the “cis” form. It is known as “solanesol” and is widely produced as an alternative to “yeast fermentation” CoQ10 by manufacturers in Korea and China. It is cheaper but less effective and absorbable.
    • There is also a fully synthetic analog of CoQ10 called “Idebenone” that is produced by a Swiss pharmaceutical company and marketed under the drug names Catena and Sovrima.
    • Other research advances are promising us “more bio-available” forms of CoQ10, including water-soluble and “nano” forms – but for now much of this is marketing hype and wishful thinking.

    The chemical giant Kaneka Corp. makes much of the high quality CoQ10 available today, in both the Ubiquinone and Ubiquinol forms. They have chemical factories in both Japan and Texas. They do not sell their CoQ10 directly to consumers – they sell to other supplement manufacturers who use it to formulate their own products.

    Kaneka allows users of it’s CoQ10 to boast about this ingredient, taking advantage of Kaneka’s marketing and advertising efforts, by letting them use the trade mark “KanekaQ10™” on formulations which contain it. However, Kaneka does not require this branding, and some supplement manufacturers prefer not to disclose the source of their ingredients. If you see the trade mark “KanekaQ10™” on a product you can be sure that there is at least some of it present (but no guarantee how much…) – but if the trade mark is not there, the product may still contain either “KanekaQ10™” or a good quality CoQ10 from one of the other big manufacturers (Nissin, Asahi or Mitsubishi).

    So, how can you know what you are getting, quality-wise? Price.

    In the world of CoQ10, price, not promises, is still what determines quality.

    The Japanese chemical giants tightly control pricing for CoQ10 – and even though retail prices have come down slightly since Kaneka Corp began manufacturing this substance in Texas, they have a very tight cartel in place to control wholesale pricing just as OPEC does with crude oil.

    If you find CoQ10 supplements being sold at unusually cheap prices there will be a good reason – quality. The product may contain Chinese or Korean (or other) semi-synthetic CoQ10, or the amount of CoQ10 contained may not be what is on the label.  Some unscrupulous manufacturers may use the trade mark “KanekaQ10™” on their formulations but actually put only a tiny amount in the product, making up the difference with another, cheaper form of CoQ10.

    Beware also of couple of other common ploys: one promises novel new delivery systems or “improved bio-availability” that allows smaller amounts of CoQ10 to be “just as effective” as larger doses, and the other is to use nasty fillers, colorings, dyes, oils, preservatives and impurities in the creation of the product in order to keep costs as low as possible and profits high.

    Is “Made in USA” a guarantee of quality? Maybe, maybe not.

    We know that there is one chemical factory in Texas that makes CoQ10 – it is the very same company that makes the very same CoQ10 in Japan. If “Made In USA” means that the product is in fact made here of all US materials then this probably means quality is good. But a product made here with CoQ10 produced in Japan is likely to be equally good quality.

    On the other hand, product “Made in USA” with CoQ10 and other materials from somewhere like China or Korea must be looked at with suspicion. How will you know? Again, price.

    More CoQ10 “Hype” to beware of:

    “bio-identical to that produced naturally within the body” – While this is true, it is just another way of saying that it is derived from yeast fermentation.

    “up to 5 times greater absorption than other varieties” – Really? What “other variety” is that? Got proof? This may be true, but it is more likely hype.

    So what can you believe?

    CoQ10 – Ubiquinone – is a vital nutrient: no argument there!

    Ubiquinol, the reduced form of Ubiquinone, is also a vital substance – that the body makes from Ubiquinone.

    Only a very few people might benefit from using the reduced form, Ubiquinol, instead of Ubiquinone despite the advertising hype surrounding this newly available form of CoQ10. There is only one human study so far showing the effectiveness of this new form, versus the hundreds of peer-reviewed studies showing the effectiveness of Ubiquinone.

    Dr. Jonathan Wright has jumped onto the Ubiquinol bandwagon but Dr. Alan Gaby, who lectures with Dr. Wright, prefers the tried-and-true form Ubiquinone. Given the hundreds of studies proving the benefit of Ubiquinone versus the one for Ubiquinol Dr. Gaby’s comment was: “when it comes to CoQ10, I’ll leave with the girl I came with!”

    The molecules that are Ubiquinone and Ubiquinol are what they are: no amount of “improved bio-availability”, “nano-particle technology”, “micronization”, or other scientific-sounding mumbo-jumbo will make a better molecule. If the molecule is actually changed, then it’s not CoQ10 anymore!

    As with any supplement, the most expensive supplement is the one that doesn’t work! Be sure to get the very best quality or you will be wasting your money – no matter how “good” the price is.

    How can the average person negotiate the minefield of quality control when it comes to supplements like CoQ10?

    Easy – you let someone like Dr. Myatt look after that for you. Known as “The Dragon Lady” in the supplement industry because of her no-compromise approach to quality, her medical knowledge and biochemistry background allow her to ask the hard questions and demand straight answers from her suppliers. She isn’t easily impressed, and is never swayed by hyper and advertising claims. If Dr. Myatt offers a product you can be sure that it meets her strict standards for purity, potency, and effectiveness! It may not be the cheapest, but you can be sure that it is the best – and is your health worth the cheapest, or is it worth the best?

  • Bio Algae – Is It Any Good?

    Bio Algae – Is It Any Good?

     

    By Nurse Mark

     

    We’ve said it before and we’ll say it again – If Dr. Myatt hasn’t heard about a product, that’s not a good sign (for the product). And if Dr. Myatt doesn’t carry a product on The Wellness Club website, there is a good reason. Either the product doesn’t meet Dr. Myatt’s standards for quality, or it doesn’t meet her standards for medical and scientific effectiveness, or it may simply be a hyped-up over-marketed product that doesn’t do anything more than the proven products that Dr. Myatt already offers, often at substantially less cost.

    Ann writes us from time to time to ask about products and sent us this note recently:

    Hi Mark
    I have some friends [who are using] bio algae concentrates.  Do you now much about it?
    Thank you   Ann

     

    Hi Ann,

    Yes, we know quite a bit about these products generally though we cannot comment specifically on the one you mention as we have not performed our usual Quality Audit process on this product. It does seem rather expensive though – but I guess someone has to pay for all the marketing hype!

    Please see our information here about Chlorella.

    You may also find the information about Modifilan to be of interest.

    Also, as a more complete plant-food supplement you should be taking Maxi Greens.

    Maxi Greens contain significant amounts of Blue-Green Algae, Chlorella, and Dunaliella salina algae along with a good balance of other flavonoids and phytonutrients.

    All these products are excellent detoxificants and provide valuable nutritive factors that are valuable for detoxification, heavy metal toxicity, blood building, general antioxidant protection, and intestinal detoxification.

    My premier recommendation would be Maxi Greens – as it is the most broad-spectrum and best for ongoing, everyday use and works out to be quite economical for the nutritive and health benefits it provides.

    Next would be chlorella, which is useful if you have specific detoxification effects that you wish to address.

    Modifilan is a great product that we recommend often, but it’s use is more specialized – it is one of our “big guns.” It contains organic iodine which feeds the thyroid gland, promoting normal metabolism and glandular function. It also has immune-stimulating anti-viral and anti-cancer properties and of course a very important use is in detoxifying the body from heavy metals, radioactive elements, free radicals and toxins.

    Still, my first choice recommendation for a “Greens” supplement is Maxi Greens !

    Hope this helps!

    Cheers,
    Nurse Mark