HealthBeat News

Category: Heart and Circulation

  • We Got ‘Spanked’ Over Salba?

    Some time ago I wrote an article about the latest “Miracle Food” being proclaimed and promoted variously as “nature’s most perfect food” and “the food of the gods”… It was a good article, well-researched, and our readers enjoyed it. Well, most of them did… For a few others, it seems that I touched a raw nerve… A fellow named Gary wrote to take us to task for publishing a “misleading” article – in other words he says we lied to you.

    Well, here is the article that cause Gary such upset – read it for yourself and see what you think. I stand by every word of it.

    And here is Gary’s letter to us:

    Name:   Gary Gxxxxxx
    Email:  garyxxxxxx@yahoo.ca; xxxxxx@corenaturals.com
    Comments:       Dear Dr. Myatt:

    I switched over from flax to Salba and found a great improvement in my overall health.  This is a misleading article because the numbers attributed to Salba in the article are in actuality the nutritional information for Chia on the USDA website.  If you had wanted to compare Salba and Flax in a truthful manner, you could have gone to any of the Salba websites for the true and accurate nutritional information.  Did you happen to notice on the USDA website for flax that there is a caveat from the USDA that because of cyanogenic glycosides, they do not recommend more than 12% flax be added to a product, or ingested.  There is no such caveat with Salba.
    Why don’t you put a warning on your packaging for Flax about this.

    I will continue to take Salba because it has proven in a very short time through clinical research that it is superior to flax.  I know I speak for many people when I say that no one minds paying more when they know exactly what they are getting.   I believe it is very fair to pay less than $1.00 a day for the proven benefits that Salba offers.  Do your due diligence and don’t play games with your valued readers.

    Yours truly,

    Gary Gxxxxxx

    P.S.  I have no affiliation with Salba.

    Hmmm… Gary, you say you have no affiliation with salba, but Gary, the “from” line of your email lists two addresses: garyxxxxxxx@yahoo.ca and the address of the CEO of the Florida-based company that touts itself as being “The Exclusive U.S. Distributor of Salba.” What’s up with that Gary?

    Dr. Myatt takes this sort of letter seriously, and though it has taken her a while to reply to it (after all, patients come first!), reply she has: fully researched and referenced as is her usual way. Here is what Dr. Myatt has to say to Gary in response to what I’m sure he thought was a stinging rebuke to us:

    [Dr. Myatt Notes: Note to readers: I believe this letter is a “plant,” written by someone with an agenda to promote Salba (chia seed), not a legitimate reader. However, I’ll answer it anyway to hopefully discourage other such bogus “responses”! (And to prove that we do in fact perform our “due diligence” when writing articles). ]

    Dear Gary

    I’m glad you’ve found salba helpful. However, I stand by every word we spoke about chia vs. salba, and it is YOU who needs to do your “due diligence” in this regard.

    Here are the facts (fully referenced) in case you’re really interested.

    Salba is a variety of the mint family; it’s botanical name is Salvia hispanica. Chia is the same herb, botanical name Salvia hispanica. Salba is just one varietal of Chia. Ergo ipso, Chia and salba are two common names for the same plant. Varietal differences do not show any significant nutritional differences. Learn more about this from a book written by the leading researcher on chia, Dr. Wayne Coates. (1).

    The marketing of chia (sold under brand names of “Salba,” “Benexia,” and “Aztec White” ) are, in my opinion, largely designed to obfuscate that it is merely a brand of chia seed being sold. “Exotic” usually sells unwitting consumers better than “gee, is that the same stuff as my chia pet?” would. But somewhere on the label you’ll see the botanical name, Salvia hispanica. Again, “exotic sells.”

    As to your comment that I should get the “real” nutritional information from the sellers website? Hahahaha! This is tantamount to saying “find out what a drug REALLY does by going to the drug company’s website.” Yeah, right. Independent research, not information presented by the seller, would seem to be a more reliable place to gather such “real” nutritional information.

    In fact, here are the nutrition claims from salbausa.com, the website I was referred to when I typed in the site you gave me, corenaturals.com. Every nutrition claim they make on their website’s homepage is either false or at least misleading. (Can you say “marketing hype”?) The website claims:

    “More omega-3’s than salmon.” This is a half-truth, which makes it also a half-lie. Salmon contains pre-formed DHA and EPA. Flax seed and chia both contain alpha-linolenic acid (ALA), a form of Omega-3 that must be converted in the body to EPA and DHA before it can used. Many people have problems making this conversion, so ALA is not truly equivalent to EPA and DHA.

    Further, although this website claims “30% more Omega-3s (ALA)” than flax seed, there is no reference cited for this claim.  According to USDA nutrition data files and other sources, flax actually has slightly more ALA than chia.(2)

    “25% more fiber than flax seed.” This one is closer to a truthful statement than any other made on the website. Actually, chia has approx 20% more fiber per 100 grams than flax seed. It also contains approximately 28% more carbohydrates than flax, making it a more “expensive” (in terms of carbohydrates) way to obtain those extra grams of fiber.(2)

    Other claims don’t compare chia to flax, they compare it to something else, such as “more magnesium than broccoli.” Of course, flax has more magnesium than broccoli, too. And so goes the list of other chia-to-NOT-flax comparisons.

    All in all, flax and chia are very close nutritionally. Chia may have more calcium and a wee bit more magnesium, but flax has a lot more potassium, zinc, copper, manganese and vitamins C and B-6. Remember, however, that most people are taking these seeds for Omaga-3 (ALA) fatty acids and fiber, not as a vitamin and mineral supplement.

    There is one important nutrient that the chia folks avoid mentioning, and that is a special type of fiber called lignan. Lignans are a special class of fiber that:

    • contain phytoestrogens (plant estrogens) which balances human estrogen levels (3-7)
    • has anti-cancer effects, especially in hormone-related cancers such as breast, prostate, ovarian and uterine cancer (8-18)
    • has bone-building effects (19-20)
    • has heart-protective effects (21-24)
    • improves blood sugar control (25-29)
    • may decrease the risk of lung (30) and colon (31) cancer
    • and may DECREASE ALL-CAUSE MORTALITY! (32)

    Flax seed is the richest known dietary source of lignans. (33,34) I can find no authoritative data demonstrating that chia seed contains any lignan, although I suspect it does. But how much? And since all lignans are not the same, and the effects/studies quoted above have been done on flax lignans specifically, even if chia proves to contain significant lignans, it remains to be studied if these will have the same effects as flax lignans.

    Here is a good t
    able of comparison, with information derived from USDA  and other authoritative sources: http://www.eatchia.com/flax.htm

    So.. flax has about the same fiber (a bit less, but also less carbs) than chia, it has more Omega-3 ALA and is high in protective lignans. And it costs a lot less. You can buy expensive “Salba” and other trademarked-brands of chia seed, but for my money, I’m sticking with organic flax seed for now.

    Got flax seed? Get it here.

    In Health,
    Dr. Myatt

    P.S.: “Cyanogenic glycosides,” also known as laetrile or vitamin B17, have long been used (with much supporting data) as a prevention for cancer. Laetrile is found in a wide variety of foods including berries, currants, millet, black beans and black-eyed peas. Populations with high intakes of laetrile have lower rates of cancer. Entire books have been written about studies on laetrile and the FDA’s cover-up of this valuable, naturally-occurring substance.

    Of course, the FDA and other government agencies claim laetrile is dangerous (to protect Big Pharma’s strangle-hold on cancer treatment). So when you state that I should warn people about the laetrile content in flax, I think it should go the other way. I should actually brag about laetrile’s content in flax and the potentially important role it has to play in cancer prevention. Meanwhile, you can trust the FDA’s word on flax seed toxicity if you choose to. I’m sticking with the numerous proven health benefits of laetrile and the paucity of “evidence” the FDA uses to condemn it.

    [Nurse Mark Notes: Dr. Wayne Coates whom Dr. Myatt refers to in her response to Gary is perhaps the world’s foremost educator on chia seeds. A research professor at the University of Arizona for over twenty-five years, Dr. Coats was among the first to grow chia seeds experimentally and later for commercial purposes. He co-authored the book Chia: Rediscovering a Forgotten Crop of the Aztecs, 2005.]

    References
    1.) Coates, Wayne; Ayerza,  Ricardo. Chia: Rediscovering a Forgotten Crop of the Aztecs, University of Arizona Press 2005.
    2.)     http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp
    3.) National Cancer Institute. Understanding Estrogen Receptors/SERMs. National Cancer Institute. January, 2005.  http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/understandingcancer/estrogenreceptors.
    4.) Wang LQ. Mammalian phytoestrogens: enterodiol and enterolactone. J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci. 2002;777(1-2):289-309.
    5.) Brooks JD, Thompson LU. Mammalian lignans and genistein decrease the activities of aromatase and 17beta-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase in MCF-7 cells. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 2005;94(5):461-467.
    6.)Mousavi Y, Adlercreutz H. Enterolactone and estradiol inhibit each other’s proliferative effect on MCF-7 breast cancer cells in culture. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol 1992; 41: 615–9.
    7.) Basly JP, Lavier MC. Dietary phytoestrogens: potential selective estrogen enzyme modulators? Planta Med 2005; 71: 287–94.
    8.) Can the combination of flaxseed and its lignans with soy and its isoflavones reduce the growth stimulatory effect of soy and its isoflavones on established breast cancer? Mol Nutr Food Res. 2007 Jul;51(7):845-56
    9.) Kitts DD, Yuan YV, Wijewickreme AN, Thompson LU. Antioxidant activity of the flaxseed lignan secoisolariciresinol diglycoside and its mammalian lignan metabolites enterodiol and enterolactone.  Mol Cell Biochem. 1999 Dec;202(1-2):91-100.
    10.) Arts ICW, Hollman PCH. Polyphenols and disease risk in epidemiological studies. Am J Clin Nutr 2005; 81 (suppl.): 317s–25s.
    11.) Linseisen J, Piller R, Hermann S, Chang-Claude J. Dietary phytoestrogen intake and premenopausal breast cancer risk in a German case-control study. Int J Cancer. 2004;110(2):284-290.
    12.) Ingram D, Sanders K, Kolybaba M, Lopez D. Case-control study of phyto-oestrogens and breast cancer. Lancet. 1997;350(9083):990-994.
    13.) Dai Q, Franke AA, Jin F, et al. Urinary excretion of phytoestrogens and risk of breast cancer among Chinese women in Shanghai. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2002;11(9):815-821.
    14.) Horn-Ross PL, John EM, Canchola AJ, Stewart SL, Lee MM. Phytoestrogen intake and endometrial cancer risk. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2003;95(15):1158-1164
    15.) McCann SE, Freudenheim JL, Marshall JR, Graham S. Risk of human ovarian cancer is related to dietary intake of selected nutrients, phytochemicals and food groups. J Nutr. 2003;133(6):1937-1942.
    16.) McCann MJ, Gill CI, Linton T, Berrar D, McGlynn H, Rowland IR. Enterolactone restricts the proliferation of the LNCaP human prostate cancer cell line in vitro. Mol Nutr Food Res. 2008 May;52(5):567-80.
    17.) Saarinen NM, Wärri A, Airio M, Smeds A, Mäkelä S. Role of dietary lignans in the reduction of breast cancer risk.  Mol Nutr Food Res. 2007 Jul;51(7):857-66.
    18.) Chen LH, Fang J, Li H, Demark-Wahnefried W, Lin X. Enterolactone induces apoptosis in human prostate carcinoma LNCaP cells via a mitochondrial-mediated, caspase-dependent pathway. Mol Cancer Ther. 2007 Sep;6(9):2581-90.
    19.) Sacco SM, Jiang JM, Reza-López S, Ma DW, Thompson LU, Ward WE.Flaxseed combined with low-dose estrogen therapy preserves bone tissue in ovariectomized rats. Menopause. 2009 Jan 29. [Epub ahead of print]
    20.) Kim MK, Chung BC, Yu VY, et al. Relationships of urinary phyto-oestrogen excretion to BMD in postmenopausal women. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2002;56(3):321-328.
    21. Vanharanta M, Voutilainen S, Rissanen TH, Adlercreutz H, Salonen JT. Risk of cardiovascular disease-related and all-cause death according to serum concentrations of enterolactone: Kuopio Ischaemic Heart Disease Risk Factor Study. Arch Intern Med. 2003;163(9):1099-1104.
    22. Cunnane SC, Hamadeh MJ, Liede AC, Thompson LU, Wolever TM, Jenkins DJ. Nutritional attributes of traditional flaxseed in healthy young adults. Am J Clin Nutr. 1995;61(1):62-68.
    23. Arjmandi BH, Khan DA, Jurna S. Whole flaxseed consumption lowers serum LDL-cholesterol and lipoprotein(a) concentrations in postmenopausal women. Nutr Res. 1998;18:1203-1214.
    24. Jenkins DJ, Kendall CW, Vidgen E, et al. Health aspects of partially defatted flaxseed, including effects on serum lipids, oxidative measures, and ex vivo androgen and progestin activity: a controlled crossover trial. Am J Clin Nutr. 1999;69(3):395-402.
    25.) Bhathena SJ, et al, Beneficial role of dietary phytoestrogens in obesity and diabetes. Am J Clin Nutr. 2002 Dec;76(6):1191-201.
    26.) Prasad K.  Secoisolariciresinol diglucoside from flaxseed delays the development of type 2 diabetes in Zucker rat. J Lab Clin Med. 2001 Jul;138(1):32-9.
    27.) Prasad K. Antioxidant Activity of Secoisolariciresinol Diglucoside-derived Metabolites, Secoisolariciresinol, Enterodiol, and Enterolactone. Int J Angiol. 2000 Oct;9(4):220-225.
    28.) Prasad K. Oxidative stress as a mechanism of diabetes in diabetic BB prone rats: effect of s
    ecoisolariciresinol diglucoside (SDG). Mol Cell Biochem. 2000 Jun;209(1-2):89-96.
    29.) Prasad K, et al, Protective effect of secoisolariciresinol diglucoside against streptozotocin-induced diabetes and its mechanism. Mol Cell Biochem. 2000 Mar;206(1-2):141-9.
    30.) Schabath MB, Hernandez LM, Wu X, Pillow PC, Spitz MR. Dietary phytoestrogens and lung cancer risk. JAMA. 2005 Sep 28;294(12):1493-504.
    31.) Cotterchio M, Boucher BA, Manno M, Gallinger S, Okey A, Harper P. Dietary phytoestrogen intake is associated with reduced colorectal cancer risk. J Nutr. 2006 Dec;136(12):3046-53.
    32.) Ivon EJ Milder, Edith JM Feskens, Ilja CW Arts, H Bas Bueno-de-Mesquita, Peter CH Hollman and Daan Kromhout. Intakes of 4 dietary lignans and cause-specific and all-cause mortality in the Zutphen Elderly Study.American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 84, No. 2, 400-405, August 2006.
    33.) Milder, I. E. J., Arts, I. C. W., Van de Putte, B., Venema, D. P., and Hollman, P. C. H. 2005. Lignan contents of Dutch plant foods: a database including lariciresinol, pinoresinol, secoisolariciresinol, and matairesinol. British Journal of Nutrition, 93:393-402.
    34.) Thompson LU. Experimental studies on lignans and cancer. Baillieres Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1998;12(4):691-705.

  • What’s Old Is New Again – Can You Say "Chia Pet?"

    What’s Old Is New Again – Can You Say "Chia Pet?"

    By Nurse Mark

    There’s a New Kid On The Fiber Block… and his name is Salba.

     

    Like you, our email has been bombarded with ads and claims and articles and come-on’s for what is being touted as being a miracle food.

    Well, I decided to do a little research – because we don’t carry this "New Miracle Food" and I wanted to be sure that we were not missing out on something that would benefit our patients and customers.

    You see, we had looked at Salba previously, and found that in our opinion it didn’t have any clear advantages over tried-and-true flax seed. Yet now, with ad after ad and with pseudo-scientific "come-on’s" breathlessly trumpeting the wonders of this new offering, I just had to be sure.

    I looked up Salba – it turns out that "Salba" is a made-up name; a trade name for Salvia hispanica which is also known more traditionally (and popularly) as Chia Seed. Yep, the same stuff that your Chia Pet grows from… You won’t find Salba listed in the USDA Nutritional Database, but you will find Chia seed. I then looked up Flax seed in the USDA Nutritional Database – I really wanted to be sure I was making a true comparison, with data from a respected source, so that I could be sure I was comparing apples and apples – not apples and oranges.

    Various of these ads glowingly proclaim that "Salba’s nutritional content leaves flaxseed in the dust. Gram for gram, it’s got more Omega 3, more fiber and way more calcium and magnesium." That really got my attention.

    Is that fact I wondered? Well, let’s look at the advertising hype, and at the facts, according to the USDA:

    More Omega 3? Nope – according to the USDA figures, Flax beats Salba for Omega 3’s by a pretty good margin.

    More Fiber? Yes, Salba does have a little more fiber per 100 grams – but at what cost? Salba’s 37.7 grams of fiber comes at the price of 43.85 grams of carbohydrates – while flax, with 27.3 grams of fiber will cost you only 28.88 grams of carbs – much closer to the ideal 1:1 ratio of fiber to carbs. This might not make a difference if your weight is ideal, but it sure could make a big difference if you are on a low-carb diet…

    Calcium? Yes, Salba has more. ‘Way more. But should you rely on this for your daily calcium intake? Not hardly! We recommend at least 1000 mg of calcium daily, more for post-menopausal women. Our Maxi Multi contains 1000 mg of calcium and everybody should be taking Maxi Multi (or an equivalent multiple vitamin) every day.

    Magnesium? Well, the USDA for some reason has not listed magnesium for chia (Salba) but looking at a Salba industry website (you knew that there would be a Salba growing industry didn’t you… complete with growers "organizations" and lobby groups and advertising campaigns…) it looks like, according to their figures Salba has 383 mg of magnesium per 100 grams. The USDA does list this important mineral for flax seed – at 392 mg per 100 grams. Hmmm… sounds like somebody’s math is off just a little bit… but again, neither food should be relied upon for one’s daily intake of this mineral.

    Better taste? That’s an opinion call, but we haven’t heard any complaints about the mild, buttery taste of flax.

    Salba keeps for up to 5 years. So does Flax seed. But why would you keep something around that long without using it?

    So what else is there to compare? Well, most of these ads tout the protein content of Salba – proclaiming "more protein than soy!" Well, so does flax. In fact, flax has over 3 grams more protein per 100 grams that Salba!

    As for other nutrients, Salba claims to provide a whole bunch of goodness in the form of antioxidants and other valuable micronutrients – but then so does flax. Flax even provides a surprising 651 mcg of eye-healthy Lutein + zeaxanthin per 100 grams – something that Salba does not claim.

    So what does Salba do that flax doesn’t? It costs more!

    One popular and respected internet source is selling Salba seed in 444gm (just less than 1 lb) bottles for $29.95. Yikes!

    Flax seed can be found on our website at $6.49 per pound.

    Let’s see: Salba = $29.95 per pound, flax = 6.49 per pound.

    So, is Salba bad or worthless? Of course not! It is a fine and valuable food, both nutrient and fiber rich. But then so is flax.

    Is it worth over four-and-a-half times the cost of flax? Not in our opinion!

    We are also "Endorsing Birdseed" – in the form of flax seed. We’ll leave the chia seed in the Chia Pets where it belongs.

    The chia seeds do have one benefit though – when they sprout on your Chia Pet they can be picked and eaten – they make a tasty addition to a fresh salad…

     

    Nutrient Salba per 100 gm Flax per 100 gm
    Energy 490 Kcal 534 Kcal
    Carbohydrate 43.85 gm 28.88 gm
    Protein 15.62 gm 18.29 gm
    Fiber 37.7 gm 27.3 gm
    Omega 3 (18:3) 17.550 gm 22.813 gm
    Omega 6 (18:2) 5.785 gm 5.903 gm
    Omega 9 (18:1) 2.007 gm 7.359 gm
    Calcium 631 mg 255 mg
    Phosphorus 948 mg 642 mg
    Potassium 160 mg 813 mg
    Zinc 3.49 mg 4.34 mg

    All figures in this table are taken from the USDA National Nutrient Database http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/search/index.html

  • We get Questions! Can Niacin Raise Blood Pressure?

    We get Questions! Can Niacin Raise Blood Pressure?

    By Nurse Mark

    One of our HealthBeat Subscribers writes occasionally with questions – and that is a good thing, because there is some serious misinformation out there in internet-land! There are plenty of competing interests, all wanting you to believe that what they tell you is the gospel truth about any given subject. While the supplement industry and most notably the MLM marketers who push berry juices and coral calcium are not immune to using hyperbole as they promote their products, they cannot hold a candle to the Big Pharma giants with their virtually limitless ability to purchase good press for their offerings while vilifying any competition.

    Consider this back-and-forth exchange that I recently had with Ann who wrote:…

    Mark
    I was just told that no flush niacin raises blood pressure…Is that so ? 
    Ann

    After giving my head a shake and reading the letter again to be sure I had read correctly I wrote Ann back:

    Hi Ann,

    Yikes! Who would tell you such a preposterous thing?!?

    We have never found anything anywhere in the medical or scientific literature, or in anecdotal reports, that would support such a statement.

    If this person who just told you this has any evidence to support this statement (other than of the "my aunt Effie was talking to her neighbor whose second cousin knew a fellow who said it made his wife’s blood pressure go up once…" variety) we would be most interested to see it.

    Our research has found that No-Flush niacin is extremely safe and well-tolerated.

    From our web page: http://www.drmyattswellnessclub.com/niacin.htm

    The Coronary Drug Project,* an extensive study of cholesterol-lowering drugs, found that niacin was the only “drug” that actually reduced mortality. (Niacin is a “B” vitamin but was tested head-to-head with drugs in the study). Follow-up studies showed that the niacin-treated group had an 11% lower death rate years after niacin therapy was discontinued, but the cholesterol-lowering drug group had an increased death rate. (Example: the Clofibrate group had a 36% higher death rate).

    One caveat however: Time-release or extended-release niacin preparations, such as those your conventional doctor would prescribe since they are available only by prescription can be toxic to the liver. Perhaps this is what your person was referring to?

    Hope this helps,
    Nurse Mark

    Ann wrote back to give me the reference where she found this information, and things became a little more clear:

    Here it is.  What it does say is it can affect blood pressure medications… http://altmedicine.about.com/od/highcholesterol/a/highcholesterol.htm

    I read this article, and here is my reply to Ann:

    Hi Ann,

    Here is what we can read "between the lines"…

    The author of this article is a naturopathic doctor – a graduate of an accredited and reputable naturopathic medical school. That is the good news.

    The content of the article was "reviewed" by the website’s "Medical Review Board". That’s the bad news – since all the members of this "Medical Review Board" are conventional medical doctors, trained in conventional medicine and in conventional pharmacy – and conventional medicine is very unfriendly toward anything that is not a product of a drug company and available only by prescription.

    Now, on to some parts of this article…

    Niacin is available in prescription form and as a dietary supplement. The American Heart Association cautions patients to only use the prescription form of niacin.

    This is to be expected – since the AHA (American Heart Association) is heavily funded and controlled by the Pharmaceutical Industry. Niacin, and No-Flush Niacin, are not prescription drugs – they are natural substances and cannot be patented, so there is no great profit in them. Time-release forms of niacin are patented, and therefore the drug companies are able to achieve their desired profit margins with them. Bravo to the author for even mentioning that niacin is available as a non-prescription supplement!

    Because of side effects, niacin should not be used to lower cholesterol unless under the supervision of a qualified health practitioner.

    This is standard CYA (Cover Your ASSetts) boilerplate that needs to be said whenever there is a chance that someone might take the advice offered in an article. It gets the authors "off the hook" if someone does something silly with their advice, hurts them self, and tries to sue for damages. Remember how the now ubiquitous warning label "WARNING – Hot Coffee May Be Hot" got it’s start…? This is like the warning I once saw associated with a fitness program which said "WARNING – Exercise can cause elevated heartrate, fatigue, and other uncomfortable symptoms. Any exercise program should only be undertaken under the close supervision of a qualified health care practitioner." But I digress…

    Niacin can increase the effect of high blood pressure medication or cause nausea, indigestion, gas, diarrhea, gout, and worsen peptic ulcers, or trigger gout, liver inflammation, and high blood sugar.

    This statement says that niacin can INCREASE the effect of high blood pressure medication – this is possible due to niacin’s beneficial effects on circulation, and it would further LOWER blood pressure. These other side effects are incredibly rare – they are not something that either Dr. Myatt nor I have encountered in our years of practice. But if any one of these side effects was ever reported and niacin was blamed, rightly or wrongly, conventional medicine will use it to frighten the uninformed away from non-prescription niacin and toward the far more profitable statin drugs (which, by the way, have far more, and far more dangerous side effects).

    The most common side effect of high-dose niacin is skin flushing or hot flashes, which is caused by widening of blood vessels. Most people only notice this when they initially start taking niacin. The flushing may be lessened by taking niacin with meals.

    This statement is true – but incomplete. This common side effect can also be avoided by using the No-Flush form of niacin.

    Although high doses of niacin showed promise in combination with drugs to lower cholesterol (called "statins), there are concerns that combining them could result in a potentially fatal condition called rhabdomyelosis. They shouldn’t be combined unless under the close supervision of a physician.

    Rhabdomyelosis is a well-known, very serious, and surprisingly common side-effect of statin drug therapy – it has nothing to do with niacin. There should be no reason to use niacin in combination with statins except for the need on the part of the doctor to write a prescription for a drug.

    In summary, Niacin is at least equally effective as statins at lowering cholesterol, and certainly safer. Someone using No-Flush Niacin and a proper diet (NOT a "Low Cholesterol" diet! see our articles Lower Cholesterol Naturally – Better Cholesterol Management with Vitamins and Herbs and Saturated Fats: Another Big Fat Lie for the full scoop on this!) should have no need to use both niacin and statins together. Further, since niacin improves microcirculation, and the diet that corrects high cholesterol also corrects high blood pressure, a person should be able to no longer need "blood pressure pills" either.

    Hope this clears things up a bit for you Ann!

  • 7 Good Reasons To Take Take Grape Seed Extract

    7 Good Reasons To Take Take Grape Seed Extract

    by Dr. Dana Myatt

    Grape seed extract is on my list of "must take" supplements." Here’s why.

    Grape Seed Extract Lowers Risk of Heart Disease

    Proanthocyanidin (OPC), a powerful antioxidant found in grape seeds, grape skins, strawberries and French maritime pine bark, has anti-inflammatory properties which have been shown to promote normal blood flow and thus benefit the cardiovascular system. In Doctor Myatt’s words, OPC’s prevent "blood sludge" that can cause strokes and heart attacks. OPC’s work like aspirin (only better and safer) to prevent abnormal blood clotting. OPC’s may be a superior answer for those who need thinner blood (like people with arrhythmias) as a safer alternative to coumadin. OPC’s are also called "pycnogenol" when they are derived from pine bark (the grape seed extract is slightly more potent and less expensive. You will see the terms pycnogenol, OPC’s, grape seed extract used interchangeably).

    In one study, 38 cigarette smokers were divided into two groups and received either 500 mg of aspirin or 125 mg of Pycnogenol. After taking these doses, each subject smoked a cigarette, which is known to increase blood platelet aggregation (blood clumping). After two hours, blood samples were analyzed. Both groups has greatly reduced platelet aggregation, but those in the aspirin group had increased bleeding times while those in the OPC group did not. Other studies in smokers have also shown the anti-aggregation effect of OPC’s.

    In another study, 30 people were given Pycnogenol and 10 were given placebo. People in the Pycnogenol group had significant reduction in blood pressure, capillary (small blood vessel) leakage, and blood vessel inflammation, all risk factors for heart disease. There were no negative side effects or adverse changes in blood chemistries from pycnogenol.

    Grape Seed Extract A Boon to Diabetics
    (and those who don’t want to be diabetics)

    Pycnogenol benefits the cardiovascular system by decreasing inflammation and improving blood viscosity in both normal and diabetic subjects. These effects can be especially important to diabetics. New research shows that OPC’s have even more benefits for diabetics by helping to lower blood sugar levels and improving microcirculation.

    OPC’s were administered to diabetic patients. Leg ulcers (which often result in gangrene and loss of limbs in diabetics) healed 25-29% faster in the group taking OPC’s. This is a significant benefit for diabetic patients and could help prevent loss of limbs that often occurs in diabetes.

    OPC’s have also been shown to help lower blood sugar levels. Researchers looked at the effect that Pycnogenol on alpha-glucosidase, an enzyme that breaks down carbohydrates into glucose molecules. In this study, pycnogenol was compared to acarbose, a synthetic drug (sold under the brand name Precose) that inhibits alpha-glucosidase. Pycnogenol was found to be 190 times more potent at inhibiting alpha-glucosidase, producing a greater delay in glucose absorption. At higher concentrations, OPC’s greatly slowed the entrance of carbohydrates into the blood stream compared to the drug.

    Another study showed that pycnogenol improved the level of microangiopathy (small blood vessel abnormalities) decreased capillary filtration, improved symptoms and reduced edema in 18 out of 18 diabetic patients, with no subjects dropping out of the study due to adverse side effects. There were no improvements seen in the control group.

    OPC’s have been shown in French trials to help limit the progression of diabetic retinopathy. In one study, 60% of diabetics taking 150 mg per day of OPCs from grape seed extract had no progression of retinopathy compared to 47% of those taking a placebo.

    Another trial including 77 subjects with type 2 diabetes, (half receiving 100 mg of Pycnogenol and half received a placebo daily), showed after 12 weeks that subjects in the Pycnogenol group had significantly lowered their plasma glucose levels compared to placebo. Pycnogenol subjects were also found to have improved artery function. In another trial of 30 type 2 diabetics, researchers found that increasing doses of pycnogenol (doses of 50, 100, 200, and 300 mg) lowered blood sugar levels in a dose-dependent fashion. (The more grape seed extract, the lower the blood sugar levels). Subjects who received 100 to 300 mg of Pycnogenol had the most significant lowering of their fasting glucose levels.

    Anti-Cancer Effects of Grape Seed Extract

    Talc (talcum powder) increases "ovarian neoplastic transformation" (turns cells of the female ovary into cancerous cells). A brand new study showed that pycnogenol blocked this talc-induced cancerous change in ovarian cells. PC’s have also been shown to induce apoptosis (programmed cell death) in breast cancer cells but not in normal breast tissue.

    OPc’s reduce four factors know to stimulate cancer cell growth: blood sugar levels, insulin levels, free radical and inflammation. This means that OPC’s may be a potent factor not only in cancer prevention but also in cancer treatment. (See our medical paper on cancer diet and nutrition for cancer for full details).

    But Wait! There’s More! (More Benefits of Grape Seed Extract)

    If heart-protective, anti-diabetic, anti-cancer effects aren’t enough to make you consider adding grape seed extract to your supplement regimen, here are a few more benefits of this amazing flavonoid for you to consider:

    * anti-allergenic (grape seed stabilizes histamine release and so acts as a natural anti-histamine, without any drowsy side-effects). Asthmatic children who took pycnogenol were able to decrease their asthma medications.

    * improves skin elasticity by increasing collagen in the skin. For this reason, OPC’s are often used in skin rejuvenation programs.

    * prevents varicose veins by strengthening blood vessels and increasing collagen (same reason it helps improve aging skin).

    * helps prevent Alzheimer’s disease by blocking the formation of beta amyloid (a protein associated with Alzheimer’s).

    * Reduces symptoms of endometriosis. This was recently reported in Family Medicine journal; yet another study showing positive benefit.

    I Don’t Know About You, But…

    The proven (but non-FDA-approved, blessed or verified) effects of grape seed extract (aka pycnogenol, OPC’s etc.) are just too great for me to overlook. I personally take 100mg, 3 times per day with meals and will continue to do so. The new research coming out on this important herb convinces me that I’ve made a good decision. Learn more about Grape Seed Extract here.

    References
    1.)Inhibition of smoking-induced platelet aggregation by aspirin and pycnogenol. Thromb Res. 1999 Aug 15;95(4):155-61.
    2.) Pine bark extract reduces platelet aggregation. Integr Med. 2000 Mar 21;2(2):73-77.
    3.) Single and multiple dose pharmacokinetics of maritime pine bark extract (pycnogenol) after oral administration to healthy volunteers. BMC Clin Pharmacol. 2006 Aug 3;6:4.
    4.) Inhibition of COX-1 and COX-2 activity by plasma of human volunteers after ingestion of French maritime pine bark extract (Pycnogenol). Biomed Pharmacother. 2006 Jan;60(1):5-9. Epub 2005 Oct 26.
    5.) Diabetic ulcers: microcirculatory improvement and faster healing with pycnogenol. Clin Appl Thromb Hemost. 2006 Jul;12(3):318-23.
    6.) Oligomeric procyanidins of French maritime pine bark extract (Pycnogenol) effective
    ly inhibit alpha-glucosidase. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2006 Nov 10.
    7.) Rapid relief of signs/symptoms in chronic venous microangiopathy with pycnogenol: a prospective, controlled study. Angiology. 2006 Oct-Nov;57(5):569-76.
    8.) Procyanidolic oligomers in the treatment of fragile capillaries and diabetic retinopathy. Med Int 1981;16:432–4 [in French].
    8.) Retinopathies and OPC. Bordeaux Medicale 1978;11:1467–74 [in French].
    9.) Contribution to the study of procyanidolic oligomeres: Endotelon in diabetic retinopathy (in regard to 30 observations). Gaz Med de France 1982;89:3610–4 [in French].
    10.) Antidiabetic effect of Pycnogenol French maritime pine bark extract in patients with diabetes type II. Life Sci. 2004 Oct 8;75(21):2505-13.
    11.) French maritime pine bark extract Pycnogenol dose-dependently lowers glucose in type 2 diabetic patients.Diabetes Care. 2004 Mar;27(3):839.
    12.) Pycnogenol reduces talc-induced neoplastic transformation in human ovarian cell cultures.Phytother Res. 2007 Mar 14; [Epub ahead of print]
    13.) Selective induction of apoptosis in human mammary cancer cells (MCF-7) by pycnogenol. Anticancer Res. 2000 Jul-Aug;20(4):2417-20.
    14.) Nutritional and Botanical Considerations in the Systemic Treatment of Cancer: 2006 Update.     http://www.drmyattswellnessclub.com/cancer2006update.htm
    15.) Pycnogenol as an adjunct in the management of childhood asthma. J Asthma. 2004;41(8):825-32
    16.) Stabilization of collagen by polyphenols. Angiologica 1972;9:248–56 [in German].
    17.) Non-enzymatic degradation of acid-soluble calf skin collagen by superoxide ion: protective effect of flavonoids. Biochem Pharmacol 1983;32:53–8.
    18.) Pycnogenol protects neurons from amyloid-beta peptide-induced apoptosis. Brain Res Mol Brain Res. 2002 Jul 15;104(1):55-65.
    19.) Pine Bark Extract Reduces Symptoms of Endometriosis. J Reprod Med. 2007;52:000-000.

  • The Double Standard of Medical Research

    The Double Standard of Medical Research

    Opinion By Nurse Mark

    It seems that there is no end to the double standards that are encountered in research – Pharmaceuticals are researched and conclusions are drawn to one standard and vitamins, herbs, and supplements are researched and conclusions drawn in another way. Sometimes it is done subtly, most times the whole exercise is painfully blatant.

    Consider the following:

    A Reuters news article reported on research findings presented to a meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. This research details efforts to find a reason to use the Big Pharma Giant Glaxo’s new drug Tykerb for breast cancer treatment. Unfortunately, the drug appears to work not very well at all, with researchers admitting that "The addition of Tykerb to standard chemotherapy treatment failed to help most breast cancer patients." The report went on though to state that their goals had been modest to begin with, seeking a success defined by the shrinking of advanced tumors by 50% in just 10 to 20 percent of the patients in the study, they felt encouraged that they had seen the goal of tumor shrinkage in just 7 percent of the patients.

    The Reuters article goes on to say:

    "This is not a home run, but the effect was real and I think we can build on it," said Dr. Nancy Lin of Harvard Medical School, an investigator in the Glaxo-funded study.

    Wow! This new drug made tumors shrink by half (not go away, but shrink) in a whole, big, seven percent of patients. Talk about your wonder-drug breakthrough! (not!)

    Here is the paragraph in the Reuters article that really explains the whole article:

    "Tykerb, approved in recent months in the United States and Switzerland for breast cancer, is being tested for other types of cancer. It is central to Glaxo’s push into cancer medicine, the fastest-growing and most profitable area in the drug market."

    So, we see this headline: "Glaxo’s Tykerb helps some breast cancer patients"

    That was about the best that they could get away with in terms of "positive spin"…

    Contrast the above with the following:

    A Medscape Article, intended to "educate" doctors, discusses a study in which Hawthorne extract (which is called WS 1442 in the study) is scientifically examined in a quite large European study to determine it’s usefulness as part of the treatment of patients on conventional therapy for congestive heart failure. Let’s look at the conclusions of the study as reported by Medscape:

    "Conclusions:

    1. Treatment with WS 1442 in mild CHF patients on optimal medical therapy is safe.
    2. Patients treated with WS 1442 have a nonsignificantly lower incidence of adverse events compared with placebo.
    3. Cardiac mortality is significantly reduced in the WS 1442 group at 18 months.
    4. Sudden cardiac death is significantly reduced in the subgroup of patients with EF ≥ 25%."

    These conclusions sound pretty good, don’t they? Well, not to Medscape they don’t – the doctor who reviewed the study had this to say: "these results may be a great source for future research; however, until then, hawthorn extract remains only a homeopathic treatment with, as of yet, no proven beneficial effect in CHF patients."

    Whaaa? Am I confused, or missing something here?

    Here’s my opinion: If this study had reported these same results for some new patented drug offering we would have seen an entirely different headline – something along the lines of "Study Shows Cardiac Death Significantly Reduced By MegaPharma’s New Drug WS 1442."

    What do you think?

    Dr. Myatt and I see this sort of double standard every day – a patented prescription drug that provides minimal or even dismal results in a tiny number of patients is deemed to have a "real effect" and is "worthy of further study" – essentially, "let’s study it until we can report something good about it." while non-patented, natural substances with a history of successful use are studied as if they were single-molecule pharmaceuticals, in studies that are virtually guaranteed to demonstrate minimal results, and if they do show positive results those results are spun in a way to diminish them as much as possible. In effect, the researchers in these drug-company sponsored "research" exercises will study a natural substance in outrageous ways – giving uselessly low or dangerously high amounts or engaging in other shenanigans designed to ensure a negative outcome.

    If you watch the news headlines with a critical eye the way we do I think you’ll see the same…

    Meanwhile, we remain big fans of Hawthorn extracts as they have been well researched and are widely used in Europe to treat many types of heart conditions including:

    • atherosclerosis
    • cardiac arrhythmia
    • congestive heart failure
    • high blood pressure
    • angina
    • vascular disease.

    Hawthorn works by dilating (opening) coronary and peripheral blood vessels and improving oxygen utilization in the heart muscle. The proanthocyanidins (PCO’s) in Hawthorn have been shown to lower cholesterol levels and decrease the size of cholesterol-containing plaques in the arteries.