Showing posts with label pregnancy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pregnancy. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 18, 2012

Toxic Overload & Autism


Yesterday, updated statistics on the rates of Autism and Autistic Spectrum Disorders (ASD) came out. The CDC (Center for Disease Control) claims 1 in 88 American children suffer with Autism or ASD. 

WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON???????

For years people have been blaming vaccines. But I don't really think that is the only reason for the rise in Autism. Since I started learning all this great stuff about nutrition and health, I have come to believe that what we eat (especially when you are pregnant) has so much more to do with your health than any other factor. And from what I have been reading about Autism, it is caused by a combination of a toxic overload and nutrition deficiencies.

Where could these kids be getting too much toxins and not enough nutrition?


Frosted Flakes, Pop Tarts, milk, Golden Grams, Gogurt, Cheerios, Coco Puffs, Hot Pockets, Fruit Roll Ups, white bread, Honey Roasted Peanuts, Taco Bell, McDonald's, Wendy's, Subway (yes Subway), pizza, french fries, chicken fingers, Combos, potato chips, Golden Grahams, Chips Ahoy, Pop Secret Extra Butter Popcorn, Chinese food takeout, Rice Crispy Treats, soy based infant formula, whey based infant formula, Ritz Crackers, squeeze cheese, string cheese, bologna, salami, hot dogs, hamburgers, Oreos, Gatorade, chocolate milk, etc, etc.

How many vegetable are on that list? Now many fresh fruits are on that list? I would venture to say this is what most kids eat today. Some sort of cereal for breakfast with milk & orange juice, a deli meat sandwich for lunch with various processed snacks, and chicken fingers and french fries for dinner. Disgusting!

No wonder there are fat kids everywhere, and Autism is on the rise.

I just read a very interesting article by Dr. Mercola on all of this. You know when you are standing on the outside looking in and you can see everything clear as day? That is how I feel about this. Dr. Mercola's article sums up all of the aspects that "could" contribute to ASD. (Although I feel like Mercola hits the nail on the head)

The Silent Time Bomb Now Affecting 1 in 54 Boys in the US 
By Dr. Mercola (Original Source)
The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has announced that 1 in 88 children in the U.S. are now diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder (ASD)i. The number represents a 23 percent increase in the last two years and 78 percent in the past five years.
But that was just the average—the numbers were much greater for Hispanics (110 percent) and black children (91 percent).
The study, published in the CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Reportii , also found that ASDs are nearly five times more common among boys than girls.
Broken down, the numbers equate to 1 in 54 boys with ASDs, and 1 in 252 girls. The updated estimates are based on data collected in 14 American communities during 2008.
These communities comprised over eight percent of all American 8-year-olds that year. Interestingly, the number of children with ASDs varied widely from site to site.
The highest prevalence was found in Utah, where a staggering 1 in 47 eight-year-olds were identified with some form of ASD.
New Jersey was also far higher than the average, with 1 in 49iii . What's really going on here?
WHAT is Causing the Skyrocketing Increase in Autism Spectrum Disorders?
Personally, I don't see how anyone can look at a 78 percent increase of any health problem in a mere five years without snapping to attention. Prior to the CDC's announcement, the Canary Party, a citizens' action group on autism, rightfully predicted that the CDC would downplay the seriousness of these latest statistics.
On its new autism webpage, the CDC state they suspect some of the increase "is due to greater awareness and better identification" among some of the children.
But even taking that possibility into consideration, the statistics are truly shocking. How can one in 88 American children have some form of autistic disorder? In a normal, healthy environment, that just shouldn't happen. And the fact that it IS happening demands our immediate attention. Something is going very wrong, very fast...
While many are focusing their efforts on nailing down one culprit or another—vaccines being the perfect example—I believe taking such a narrow-minded approach can be extremely counterproductive. In my view, what we're seeing here is the culmination of what amounts to a perfect storm...
Research is now clearly showing that environmental factors play a primary role in the epidemic of autism spectrum disorders. But which environmental factors are to blame?
While vaccines have borne the brunt of people's suspicions, there's plenty of evidence suggesting there are multiple factors at play. The factor that prevents us from writing vaccines off as being harmless is the fact that toxic overload appears to be at the core of the problem, and many vaccines do indeed contribute to a child's overall toxic load. So while it's probably unreasonable to blame vaccines alone for the rapid rise in autism, it would be just as unreasonable to ignore their impact, and continue on with the one-fits-all vaccination policy as if everything is a-okay.
The majority of autism cases do appear to result from the activation or "expression," of a number of different genes, along with multiple epigenetic and environmental factors that interact to produce the traits of autism. But science is increasingly showing us just how malleable our genes are—they continuously respond to their environment, meaning, your body and everything you put into and onto it... Furthermore, there's no shortage of evidence that toxins of different sorts can wreak havoc with brain function. Add to this the more recent findings that your gut is profoundly influential for brain health, and a picture of toxic overload combined with inadequate nutrition comes into clear view.
Why We Must Insist on Invoking the Precautionary Principle
If multiple toxic exposures and poor nutrition is to blame, then trying to tease out "the" primary culprit will get us nowhere. I believe we must tackle the issue of ASD with a much wider aim, and that is to reduce ALL toxic exposure and improve nutrition. This tactic includes but is not limited to reducing the vaccine load, especially in the US where children receive the most vaccines of any country on the planet. I believe it's imperative to invoke the precautionary principle with respects to vaccines, and, at the very least, allow people to opt out if they so choose.
While vaccine advocates tend to stress the importance of so-called "herd immunity," saying the vaccine will not work unless the majority is vaccinated, there's a great price to pay by forcing everyone into a one-size-fits-all mold.
Not only are some children at greater risk for vaccine damage than others (which I'll review in a moment), but we also eliminate the ability to evaluate the health risks of vaccinations if no one is allowed to opt out. We NEED to conduct comparison studies to evaluate the health outcomes of vaccinated versus unvaccinated children, yet such studies are not done. An oft-cited reason for that is that it would be unethical to not vaccinate certain children... But this is not really a reasonable excuse today, as many parents want to opt out of one or more vaccines for their children.
Environmental Factors that May Play a Role in Autism
When looking into the possible environmental factors for autism, they are incredibly diverse. The following is just a short list of examples:
Electromagnetic fields: Work by Dr. Dietrich Klinghardt suggests there are distinct correlations between a woman's exposure to electromagnetic fields during pregnancy and her child's neurological functioning. He found that if you sleep in strong electromagnetic fields during pregnancy, your child will likely begin to exhibit neurological abnormalities within the first two years of life, such as neurological dysfunction, hyperactivity, and learning disorders.
In 2007, this theory received additional support from a study published in the Journal of the Australasian College of Nutritional & Environmental Medicineiv . It presented the theory that electromagnetic radiation (EMR) from cell phones, cell towers, Wi-Fi devices and other similar wireless technologies may work in conjunction with genetic and environmental factors, becoming an accelerating factor in autism. After more than five years of research on children with autism they found that EMR negatively affects cell membranes, allowing heavy metal toxins, which are associated with autism, to build up.
To learn more about the science of HOW electromagnetic radiation affects and harms your body, please review this previous article featuring Dr. Martin Blank.
Mercury toxicity: It is already an established fact that exposure to mercury can cause immune, sensory, neurological, motor, and behavioral dysfunctions -- all similar to traits defining, or associated with autism. Mercury pollution is widespread from the burning of fossil fuels, but the use of thimerosal-containing vaccines and dental amalgams—both of which contain mercury—also cannot be overlooked as major sources of individual exposure to this neurotoxin
Vaccines: A 2011 reviewv of the peer-reviewed, published studies on autism (going all the way back to 1943) revealed numerous documented cases of autism caused by encephalitis following vaccination. There are many potential vaccine-related culprits, including the use of toxic adjuvants; the presence of human DNA in vaccines; and the increasing number of vaccines given in a short period of time
Phthalates: Research from 2009 discovered that infants who lived in homes with vinyl floors were twice as likely to have autism five years later, compared to those with wood or linoleum flooring. Vinyl floors can emit chemicals called phthalates, which are widely used plastic softeners found in much more than just vinyl flooring. Hairsprays, perfumes, cosmetics, toys, shower curtains, wood finishers, lubricants, certain medical devices and more all contain phthalates. Researchers have suggested the chemicals may contribute to autism by disrupting hormones not only in small children but also in the womb
Vitamin D Deficiency: There is also a link between rampant vitamin D deficiency in pregnant women and the proportionate jump in autism, which has been highlighted by Dr. John Cannellvi . The vitamin D receptor appears in a wide variety of brain tissue early in the fetal development, and activated vitamin D receptors increase nerve growth in your brain
Neurologist Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride recently shared a common thread that may be linking these and other environmental factors together, namely brain toxicity stemming from gut toxicity, otherwise known as Gut and Psychology Syndrome (GAPS). She cured her own son of autism using an all-natural treatment involving dietary changes and detoxification, and her hypothesis is in my view one of the most elegant.
GAPS: An Elegant Explanation of the Roots of Autism
Dr. Campbell-McBride is convinced that autistic children are born with perfectly normal brains and sensory organs, but that abnormal gut flora, passed on from their mother and father, leads to devastating gut and brain toxicity. In children with Gut and Psychology Syndrome (GAPS), toxicity flowing from their gut throughout their bodies and into their brains, literally clogs the brain with toxicity, preventing it from performing its normal function and processing sensory information.
But what leads to such devastatingly abnormal gut flora?
Dr. Campbell discovered that a large percentage of mothers of autistic children were bottle-fed. Then, as they received many courses of antibiotics throughout their childhood, they developed increasingly worse abnormalities in their gut flora, which in turn was passed on to their children. Add to that a diet of processed foods and the use of birth control pills, and the damage to a woman's gut flora deepens even further, and each generation quickly gets worse and worse, unless active remediation is undertaken. According to Dr. Campbell-McBride:
"Many of these modern factors created a whole plethora of young ladies in our modern world who have got quite deeply abnormal gut flora by the time they are ready to have their first child."
Vaccination Policy is Oftentimes the "Straw that Breaks the Camel's Back"
Dr. Campbell-McBride's book Gut and Psychology Syndrome contains an entire chapter outlining what health care professionals need to do to improve the vaccination strategy, because the standard vaccination protocol is bound to damage GAPS babies.
She explains:
"It's a matter of the last straw breaking the camel's back. If the child is damaged enough, the vaccine can provide that last straw. But if it doesn't provide that last straw in a particular child, then it will get the child closer to the breaking point."
Fortunately, it's possible to rather inexpensively identify GAPS within the first weeks of your baby's life, which can help you make better-informed decisions about vaccinations, and about how to proceed to set your child on the path to a healthy life. The entire process for identifying children who would be at risk for developing autism from a vaccine is described in her book, but to sum it up, in her practice she starts out by collecting a complete health history of the parents, and their gut health is assessed. Then, within the first few days of life, the stool of the child can be analyzed to determine the state of her gut flora, followed by a urine test to check for metabolites, which can give you a picture of the state of your child's immune system.
These tests are available in most laboratories around the world and cost a very reasonable amount, about $80-100 per test -- peanuts compared to the incredible expense of treating an autistic child once the damage is done.
In my view it is absolutely VITAL to perform this analysis BEFORE you consider vaccinating your child. If the test results are normal the likelihood of autism after vaccines is dramatically reduced. As Dr. Campbell-McBride states, she has yet to find an autistic child with normal bowel flora. If you find that your baby has abnormal gut microflora, or begins to develop symptoms of autism a year or two later, the GAPS program should be started immediately, as the younger the child is when you start the treatment, the better the results. The child should not be given any vaccines until their microflora tests normal. For more information about the GAPS Nutritional Program, including the two types of GAPS diets, and the importance of fermented foods, please review this previous article.
Thoughts on Reversing the Trajectory of Autism Spectrum Disorders
Autism is a complex condition with many contributing factors and it takes a multi-faceted approach to treat it. We're now also beginning to understand it requires a multi-faceted approach to prevent it. Hopefully, more people will begin to take Dr. Campbell-McBride's information to heart and put it to practice so that more children may be spared from the get-go. But even that's not going far enough. We must tackle this problem from all angles, and that also includes:
Reduce your and your child's toxic burden: This includes avoiding as many dangerous chemicals as possible, which makes listing the do's and don'ts virtually impossible. There's just too many. As a general rule though, eating whole organic foods will go a long way, as that automatically cuts out processed foods and related chemicals, genetically engineered foods, and artificial sweeteners.
Also be careful with the personal care products you use, as well as your household cleaning products and home building materials and furnishings... Opting for "green" and/or organic alternatives will help reduce many of the toxins most people encounter on a daily basis.
Do whatever you can to establish a toxin-free environment for your whole family, and then establish a detoxification program. Please remember hidden toxins like mold and fluoride. The book, Our Toxic World: A Wake Up Call, by Dr. Doris Rapp is an excellent resource if you're unsure of how or where to start.
Lower the EMF burden in your home, especially in your bedrooms.
Carefully review the vaccination issue, including the conventional vaccination schedule, and know that in most U.S. states you still have the right to opt out of vaccines.
Avoid pasteurized milk; it's an absolute imperative to the treatment of autism. Anyone managing this illness without restricting milk is deceiving themselves. This includes all milk products, such as ice cream, yogurt and whey. Even natural flavorings in food must be avoided unless the processor can guarantee that caseinate is not included.
Complete elimination of sugar/fructose, juice, soda, French fries and wheat (pasta, bagels, cereal, pretzels, etc) is also highly recommended.
Get proper sun exposure. It is my personal belief that vitamin D deficiency in conjunction with damaged gut flora may be two of the most significant contributing factors to autism. Optimizing your vitamin D levels and your gut flora during pregnancy appears to be the most important prevention strategies discovered to date.

Thursday, December 15, 2011

Just SOY No


I wrote recently on why I do not eat soy, and why I would never recommend that people eat it regularly. This video from Dr. Mercola sums up the dangers of eating soy very concisely.


         The Dark Side of Soy by Dr. Mercola
The vast majority of soy at your local market is not a health food. The exception is fermented soy, which I’ll explain more about later and even worse GMO soy that is contaminated with large pesticide residues as the reason it is GMO is so they can spray the potent toxic herbicide Roundup on them to improve crop production by killing the weeds.
Unlike the Asian culture, where people eat small amounts of whole non-GMO soybean products, western food processors separate the soybean into two golden commodities—protein and oil. And there is nothing natural or safe about these products.
Dr. Kaayla Daniel, author of The Whole Soy Story, points out thousands of studies linking soy to malnutrition, digestive distress, immune-system breakdown, thyroid dysfunction, cognitive decline, reproductive disorders and infertility—even cancer and heart disease.
Here is just a sampling of the health effects that have been linked to soy consumption:
  • Breast cancer
  • Brain damage
  • Infant abnormalities
  • Thyroid disorders
  • Kidney stones
  • Immune system impairment
  • Severe, potentially fatal food allergies
  • Impaired fertility
  • Danger during pregnancy and nursing
As I have mentioned before...SOY IS IN EVERYTHING!!! Read labels, figure out if you are okay with the supposed pros & cons. I know I'm not, and my view on food is that it's virtue shouldn't be questionable. There is no controversy with eating kale or carrots.

What are your opinions about soy? Beneficial or detrimental?

Monday, November 28, 2011

FACT: Eating Fat Does Not Translate Into Getting Fat


I wanted to write this as a follow-up to 'Tis the Season to Get Fat, because I know a lot of people have the misconception that you will loose weight by eating low-fat foods. This is a very complicated topic so I will boil it down for you as best I can.

Everything that you eat breaks down into 3 different components: protein, fat, and carbohydrates. (There are many other things like vitamins and minerals that we get from food, however for the sake of this discussion I will be focusing on these three.) Your body needs all three of these to function properly, and your body knows the difference between the good forms and the bad forms.

Let's talk specifically about fat. I grew up being told that fat was bad for you and anything fat-free was healthy. It all started long before I was born...
"The demonization of saturated fat began in 1953, when Dr. Ancel Keys published a paper comparing saturated fat intake and heart disease mortality. His theory turned out to be flimsy, to say the least, but the misguided ousting of saturated fat has continued unabated ever since. Fortunately, the truth is finally starting to come out, as medical scientists have begun to seriously question Keys' findings."
"Keys based his theory on a study of six countries, in which higher saturated fat intake equated to higher rates of heart disease. However, he conveniently ignored data from 16 other countries that did not fit his theory. Had he chosen a different set of countries, the data would have shown that increasing the percent of calories from fat reduces the number of deaths from coronary heart disease."
"And when you include all 22 countries for which data was available at the time of his study, you find that those who consume the highest percentage of saturated fat have the lowest risk of heart disease."
"Furthermore, many have now realized that it's the trans fat found in margarine, vegetable shortening, and partially hydrogenated vegetable oils that is the true villain, causing far more significant health problems than saturated fat ever could!"
"Still, despite the scientific evidence, the low-fat dogma remains a favorite among most government health authorities. Case in point: the most recent food chart issued by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in December of last year, recommends reducing your saturated fat intake to a mere seven percent of caloric intake—down from its previously recommended 10 percent…" (Original Source)
I don't like citing studies to back up my opinions (mainly because I do not trust that the results are accurate due to biases), but I respect the information that Dr. Mercola puts out (excerpt from above). I am far more impressed with personal experiences, trials, and tribulations. So let me tell you about what I have been doing. I eat full fat everything, but I also eat mainly whole foods. I eat organic butter, organic dairy, I eat whole eggs, I eat avocados, I eat all nuts, and just about anything else you could think of that is considered "fattening". Moderation is key here. Since I started doing this about a year ago, I have lost about 10 lbs. I workout a few times a week, and I eat mainly whole foods- meaning I eat mostly un-processed foods- meaning I make most of my food from scratch and eat a lot of fruits and vegetables. I still use flour and eat pasta, but try to always eat whole wheat/grain if it is processed.

Back to fat...I read an entire book dedicated to explaining fat that was written by Mary G. Enig, PhD. She is a nutritionist/biochemist who has spent her career studying and analyzing fat. My understanding of good and bad fats started when I read Mary's book, Know Your Fats.
"As we close the second millennium, the prevailing clinical approach from both the nutrition and medical communities in the United States is to condemn a high dietary intake of almost all fats. This emphasis on reducing dietary fat intake has developed from concerns about diet/serum cholesterol, coronary heart disease (CHD) and dietary fat/cancer relationships that have emanated from organizations such as the American Heart Association (AHA), the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute's National Cholesterol Education Program, and the US Department of Agriculture's Dietary Guidelines. Many official and quasi-official, articles and publications written for the public reflect this view. Unfortunately, for the consumer and the clinician, many of these articles have multiple misstatements about fats, oils, and cholesterol in general, and about the hydrogenated fats and oils in particular. The kindest thing that can be said about the authors of these misstatements is that they are misguided and not sufficiently knowledgeable about the chemistry of fats and oils and hydrogenation."
FYI...this is a technical definition of fat straight out of her book, "Fats and oils (technically called lipids) are basically made up of collections of molecules called triglycerides. If the collection is liquid at ambient (room) temperature, it is called an oil; if it is solid, it is called a fat." She gets way technical and I figured that I would lose the majority of you on this, but if you are really interested I suggest reading the book for yourself.

Below are some common misconceptions from Know Your Fats...

  • Calling animal fats "saturated" is not only misleading, it is just plain wrong. For example, beef fat is 54% unsaturated, lard is 60% unsaturated, and chicken fat is 70% unsaturated. 
  • None of the naturally occurring fats and oils is made up of only all saturated or all unsaturated fatty acids; rather they are mixtures of different amounts of various fatty acids. 
  • The food industry knows that cookies and crackers, as well as cakes, pastries, and donuts have to be made with a fat at least as firm as a soft fat like lard, so the industry changes the liquid oils, such as soybean, corn, canola, cottonseed, and sometimes peanut and safflower oils, into fats by a process called partial hydrogenation. 
  • Partial hydrogenation increases the degree of "saturation" of the fat and has created an entirely new class of fats called trans fats. Trans fats have a very, very long shelf life, unlike the original, highly unsaturated oils they were made from. The unsaturated oils become rancid (bad, spoiled, you wouldn't want to eat them) easily if they are not stored very carefully...a-hem...this is why your box of Ritz crackers can sit on a grocery store shelf for months and then in your cabinet for months!
For shitz & giggles I looked up the ingredient list of Ritz Crackers...Ingredients: ENRICHED FLOUR (WHEAT FLOUR, NIACIN, REDUCED IRON, THIAMINE MONONITRATE [VITAMIN B1], RIBOFLAVIN [VITAMIN B2], FOLIC ACID), SOYBEAN OIL, SUGAR, PARTIALLY HYDROGENATED COTTONSEED OIL, SALT, LEAVENING (BAKING SODA AND/OR CALCIUM PHOSPHATE), HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP, SOY LECITHIN (EMULSIFIER), NATURAL FLAVOR, CORNSTARCH. (Original Source)


  • The word Omega is used to designate unsaturated fatty acid families. Saturated fats (cocoa butter, dairy fats, nutmeg butter, palm oil, tallow) do not have an Omega designation. Omega 3's and 6's are considered "essential" because our bodies cannot make them. There are also Omega 9's, however our bodies can make them so they are  not considered "essential"
  • Saturated fatty acids are not all the same. They come in different lengths. The shorter ones of the type found in butter, coconut oil, and palm kernel oil, have much lower melting points than the more common longer chain saturated fatty acids ( ). 
  • When shorter chain fatty acids are used by the body for energy, they do not produce as many calories as the longer chain fatty acids. This is why there are fewer kilocalories in a pound of butter than a pound of margarine made with seed oils. While this difference in calories is small, it is still significant because most people have been lead to believe that butter has more calories than margarine. 

Here are just a handful of examples of what trans fats do to us when we eat them... (P.S. after I read this book I cut out all foods that have hydrogenated or partially hydrogenated oils in them)
  • When people eat fats containing trans fatty acids (hydrogenated oils), these fatty acids are deposited in varying amounts in some of the tissues, and they have an effect on the way the organs in the body function. 
  • Feeding trans fatty acids from partially hydrogenated vegetable oils to adult humans lowers HDL cholesterol (the good cholesterol).
  • HDL is significantly decreased, LDL is increased, and the more recent studies have shown that the heart disease marker called Lipoprotein [a] is increased, especially in people who already have high levels of this lipoprotein.
  • INTERESTING...saturated fatty acids lower Lipoprotein [a] levels, so an adequate amount of saturated fatty acids in the diet is a good thing to have.
  • Consuming trans fats raises the blood sugar levels and causes people to weigh several kilograms more than people consuming the same amount of fat that is not hydrogenated. 
  • When researchers have examined the fat in milk that mothers are producing, they have found up to 17% of the fatty acids as trans fatty acids. That is very high, but when they measured the levels in mothers who were not eating foods with trans fatty acids, the levels were so low that they found less than 1%. 
  • Feeding infants with milk containing trans fatty acids that came in through the mother's diet causes a significant decrease in visual acuity. 
The bottom line is that we eat a lot more unhealthy fats than we realize. It would be safe to say that anything fried at a restaurant has been fried in partially hydrogenated oil. It is also safe to say that the majority of the snack foods, deserts, and baked goods that you buy have partially hydrogenated oils in them. Even some "health" foods include this disaster of an ingredient in them....so CHECK YOUR LABELS! Start incorporating more homemade meals with whole foods. If you are pregnant or breast feeding it is soooo important to eat foods without hydrogenated oils (or high fructose corn syrup) in them. It's one thing to knowingly do something to yourself (many of us do it everyday- we smoke, we drink, we eating garbage) but it is another to do it to your perfect baby. (I don't want to make you feel like I am talking down to you or making you feel guilty...but TOO BAD I AM! DON'T FEED YOUR CHILDREN TOXIC GARBAGE...THINK FOR YOURSELF...DO YOUR OWN DAMN RESEARCH...BE AWARE!)

I am giving you the Jess Face (with perfect hair)
Do you worry about eating too much fat?

Thursday, November 3, 2011

Breastfeeding: that's what boobies are there for


Sorry guys, no pictures of boobs :( Although I am no where near being pregnant or thinking about having to breastfeed, I came across a section in the book The Whole Soy Story by Kaayla T. Danie, PhD, CCN that was related to soy in infant formulas as well as using soymilk instead of formulas. So I thought I would elaborate in case some of you out there are pregnant or have a newborn. All of the information in this post comes from the book mentioned above and The Womanly Art of Breast Feeding by the La Leche League International (plus my own humble thoughts).

First I will start with the benefits of breastfeeding your baby:

  • There is no formula that comes close to the milk your body creates. Your milk has every vitamin, mineral, and other nutritional element that your baby's body needs (including many that have not even been discovered or named yet. 
  • Your breast milk changes throughout the meal, day, and year to match the subtle changes in your babies requirements. 
  • Living cells that are unique to your milk inhibit the growth of harmful bacteria and viruses in his or her still maturing system.
  • Colostrum, the milk you produce in small amounts in the first couple of days after your baby is born (and which you start producing while you are pregnant) has concentrated immunological properties that are your baby's first protection against all the germs he or she is suddenly exposed to. This "first milk" contains an anti-infective agent that coats his or her intestines to protect against the passage of germs and foreign proteins that could create allergic sensitivities. 
  • Breastfeeding deepens your attachment to each other
  • Without it's mother's breast milk, the baby is at a higher risk of:
    • ear infections
    • intestinal upsets 
    • respiratory problems
    • allergies
    • dental problems
  • Without it's mother's breast milk, the baby's vision, nerves, and intestines don't develop fully. His or her kidneys and liver work harder to process the waste products from the formula. He or she will need more of any medication to get the same effect, his or her immune system's response to vaccinations is less effective, and the risk of SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) are higher. (Source: The Womanly Art of Breastfeeding by the La Leche League International)
Now on to what I read about soy milk and infant formulas...

News headlines about babies being severely damaged by soy milk used as a substitute for infant formula sent ripples through the health food industry in 1990. The first story came from Arkansas where a severely malnourished 5 month old baby was admitted to a hospital for heart failure, rickets, vasculitis and neurological damage. This baby had been fed nothing but SoyMoo since she was 3 days old. An analysis of the soy milk revealed deficiencies in calcium, niacin, and vitamins D, E and C. On June 3rd, 1990, after several other cases had been publicized, the FDA issued a warning about using soy milk instead of infant formula saying they were "grossly lacing in the nutrients needed for infants" and asked all manufacturers, importers and private label distributors to put warning labels on soy milks so they would not be used as formula substitutes. 

Soy infant formula was never used traditionally in Asia. Babies who could not be breastfed by their birth mothers received homemade dairy formulas made with mare, water buffalo, cow, or goat's milk, were breastfed by a wet nurse...or died. Inventors of the first soy formulas were westerners with very good intentions- to save babies that would not otherwise have survived. (Did I ever tell you the saying "the road to Hell is paved with good intentions"? NO? Well it's true. Good intentions do not promise good outcomes.) 

Here were some of the problems with the original soy formulas from the 1940's-1960's:
  • vitamin A deficiencies
  • vitamin K deficiencies
  • vitamin B12 deficiencies
  • calcium deficiencies
  • zinc deficiencies
  • iron deficiencies
  • gastrointestinal side effects
  • thyroid damage
  • too much manganese associated with brain damage, learning disabilities, ADD, violence- AWESOME!
Soy infant formula manufacturers have also failed to match the fatty acid profile of breast milk. Soy formulas also lack cholesterol, a vital substance needed by the growing babies brain and nervous system. Human breast milk is something like 50% cholesterol (I read that somewhere recently- not from this book), AND breast milk contains a special enzyme to ensure that the baby absorbs all the cholesterol available. 

Soy formulas also adversely effect the immune system leading to more infections than breast or cow's milk formulas. 

And the best part about all of this is! Soy formulas are made with soy protein isolate (SPI) which is the product of a high-tech industrial processing involving high temperatures, high pressures, solvent extraction and alkaline baths. These processes compromise protein, vitamin and mineral quality and create toxins. Soy formulas also contain levels of aluminum 10 times greater than milk-based formula and 100 times greater than breast milk- which can negatively affect bone and nervous system development. 

The ingredient lists of most brands of soy formula reveal many additives of questionable safety such as carrageenan, guar gum, sodium hydroxide (caustic soda), potassium citrate monohydrate (must be so healthy!), tricalcium phosphate, dibasic magnesium, phosphate trihydrate, BHA, and BHT. Wow, I don't know about you but I don't know what any of that S-H-I-T is?!? 

WHAT THE F- ARE YOU ABOUT TO FEED YOUR PERFECT NEWBORN BABY?????? 

AFTER EVERYTHING I HAVE BEEN WRITING ABOUT NOT FEEDING YOURSELF CHEMICALS...PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE DO MORE RESEARCH IF YOU STILL NEED TO BE CONVINCED OF NOT FEEDING YOUR PERFECT BABY THIS GARBAGE!


"Some mothers say they don't want to breastfeed because they don't want to be tied down, but most breastfeeding mothers will tell you that breastfeeding actually frees them up! No measuring, spilling, or heating. No planning, leftovers, or spoilage. Most likely a lot fewer trips to the doctor. Your milk is always available, always the right temperature, and never spoiled, no matter how hot or cold it is outside. The money that you don't spend on formula in a year could pay for a high-end appliance. And- this is a big one- in an emergency of any kind, from a minor problem to a natural disaster that means shortages of formula and clean water to prepare it, breastfeeding your baby is one way to ensure you'll always have a way to feed him or her," writes the La Leche League in their book The Womanly Art of Breastfeeding.

Here are some other links to more information:

http://www.breastfeeding.com/
http://www.llli.org/nb.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breastfeeding
http://www.kellymom.com/bf/

Tuesday, October 11, 2011

A Bitter Pill to Swallow...how vitamins may not actually be healthy


I have a different view than most on vitamins. I used to take them... loads of them from time to time. I also never watched what I ate. A couple things happened to change my views on whether taking vitamins is appropriate or not. 

The first was Nani getting diagnosed with stage 4 pancreatic cancer. She always took a lot of vitamins, and always pushed them on me regardless of how good or bad I was feeling.  If I was sick the first thing she asked me was "Did you take lots of vitamin C and zinc?". It was one of the dreaded topics of conversations I used to have with her (the others were my period and PMS, saving money, having safe sex, and dressing to stay warm- this continued until she died...I was 27 years old and very well at judging how to dress for my comfort level). She would have recommendations of what I should be taking- vitamin C, fish oil capsules, iron, zinc and echinacea were her usuals. A new one would creep in every once and a while; I assume after she got done reading the latest article about miracles in pills.  Anyway, I took many different kinds for years. I took selenium for my brain, vitamin E for my skin, iron for my energy,and a multi-vitamin among others.

Before Nani was diagnosed, I had thought she was relatively healthy and that she would be around for a long time. This came as a great shock to us all, especially considering we knew how fast the disease would take her. My world was blown, because I was under the impression that vitamins will make you and keep you healthy. As some of you may be aware, I put myself in charge of researching foods that would keep Nani strong and healthy through chemo. This is where I started to learn how foods have vitamins in them. I am laughing at this now, because it seems so ridiculous that I didn't think that before, but I really didn't give healthy foods any weight. This is also where I was introduced to the "fresh and raw" movement. 

The second thing that changed my view on taking vitamins was the addition of fruit and vegetable smoothies into my diet a few months ago. I literally never felt half as good when I was taking vitamins as I do now just eating a whole lot of whole fruits and vegetables. It seems absurd to me now, knowing what I know, that more people don't know that you don't need to spend hundreds and thousands of dollars on vitamins and minerals if you eat a wide variety of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, beans & legumes, and get a little sun. That's it! 

In my humble opinion, the only time a vitamin should be used is for a brief period to normalize your levels while you change your diet to incorporate more of those vitamin-rich foods. Your body absorbs vitamins and minerals from the food you give it! It is quite simple. We are literally machines for breaking down food into teeny tiny parts so that our bodies can use those parts to function properly. Did you know that every organ in your body is used for digestion? Every single one of them!

Enough preaching. Below is a brief article about the risk of taking unnecessary vitamins. I urge you to do some research and use a little common sense on this issue. The more fresh, raw, healthy, whole foods you incorporate into your diet, the more your body will pull out in the form of vitamins and minerals. 

Vitamins linked with higher death risk in older women By Michelle RobertsHealth reporter, BBC News (Link to Original Article)
When it comes to vitamins, it appears you could have too much of a good thing, say researchers who report a link between their use and higher death rates among older women.Experts have suspected for some time that supplements may only be beneficial if a person is deficient in a nutrient. 
And excess may even harm, as the study in Archives of Internal Medicine finds.All of the women, in their 50s and 60s, were generally well nourished yet many had decided to take supplements. 
Multivitamins, folic acid, vitamin B6, magnesium, zinc, copper and iron in particular appeared to increase mortality risk.The researchers believe consumers are buying supplements with no evidence that they will provide any benefit. 
Harms v Gains 
They are quick to stress that their study relied on the 38,000 US women who took part in it recalling what vitamins and minerals they had taken over the previous two decades.And it is difficult to control for all other factors, like general physical health, that might have influenced the findings. 
But they say their findings suggest that supplements should only be used if there is a strong medically-based cause for doing so because of the potential to cause harm."Based on existing evidence, we see little justification for the general and widespread use of dietary supplements," Dr Jaakko Mursu of the University of Eastern Finland and his research colleagues said. 
Less is More 
Conversely, calcium supplements appeared to reduce death risk. However, the researchers say this finding needs more investigation and they do not recommend that people take calcium unless advised to by a doctor in order to treat a deficiency. 
In the study, iron tablets were strongly linked with a small (2.4%) increased death risk, as were many other supplements. The link with iron was dose-dependent, meaning the more of it the individual took, the higher their risk was.  
Drs Christian Gluud and Goran Bjelakovic, who review research for the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews to evaluate best evidence, said: "We think the paradigm 'The more the better' is wrong." 
They say dietary supplementation has shifted from preventing deficiency to trying to promote wellness and prevent diseases, and caution: "We believe that for all micronutrients, risks are associated with insufficient and too-large intake." 
Helen Bond of the British Dietetic Association said some people, like the elderly, might need to take certain supplements. For example, vitamin D is recommended for people over the age of 65. 
But she said that generally, people should be able to get all the vitamins and minerals they needed from a healthy, balanced diet. 
She said some took supplements as an insurance policy, wrongly assuming that they could do no harm. "But too much can be toxic and it is easy to inadvertently take more than the recommended daily amount." 
Link to Original Article

I thought it would be good to include a brief summary of which vitamins and minerals are in which foods. If you have any more questions on this, just email me at jessicageier@gmail..com and I can point you in the right direction, but as you can see from below, if you eat a variety of fresh, raw, healthy, and whole foods you will get all of your vitamins and minerals.
  • Vitamin A
    • whole eggs
    • dairy
    • beef liver (yum!)
    • dark green veggies
  • B vitamins
  • Vitamin C
    • fruits, especially citrus, kiwi, strawberries, tomato, watermelon, bananas
    • vegetables- green peppers, broccoli, carrots, potatoes 
  • Vitamin D
    • sunlight
    • fatty fish
    • egg yolks
    • beef liver
  • Vitamin E
    • vegetable oils 
    • nuts
    • beans
    • whole grains
  • Vitamin K
    • dark green leafy veggies & cabbage
    • beef liver (AGAIN?)
    • the bacteria in our intestines can synthesize vitamin K when they are healthy
  • Calcium
    • dairy
    • dark green vegetables
    • seaweeds
    • sesame
    • soy (I would not recommend this as an option)
    • almonds
  • Fluoride
    • tea
    • seafood
    • also found in fluoridated water which should be considered toxic but is still forced on us
  • Iodine
    • seafood
    • iodized salt (use sea salt instead- it has all of its trace minerals still intact)
  • Iron (absorbed better when eaten with vitamin c rich foods)
    • red meat
    • organ meats
    • fish
    • poultry
    • eggs
    • beans
    • lentils
    • green leafy vegetables
    • dried fruits
  • Magnesium
    • green leafy vegetables
    • legumes
    • nuts
    • seeds
    • whole grains
  • Phosphorus
    • most foods including animal and plant
  • Potassium
    • most foods including animal and plant
  • Selenium
    • meat
    • chicken
    • fish & seafood
    • brazil nuts
    • whole grains
    • garlic
    • mushrooms
  • Sodium
    • sea salt
    • soy sauce
    • sea vegetables
  • Zinc
    • meat
    • poultry
    • seafood
    • eggs
    • dairy
    • whole grains
    • legumes
SIDE NOTE: Taking vitamins during pregnancy is a different story, and I probably will not write about it until I am forced to when I become pregnant and have to make the choice for myself (hopefully it will be a while...not there yet if you know what I mean). Until then it would be based on my beliefs now. I would think they might change a little if I have another human being growing inside of me. 

If you are pregnant and have had this dilemma yourselves I would love to hear about it. Please comment!

10/12/10 UPDATE
 As I was looking on Self Magazine's website (for other reasons) I found an article on their Healthy Self Blog on the dangers of vitamins. Read below: 

Study Points to Dangers of Vitamin Supplements

 By Healthy Self Blog

This study might make you think twice about popping a multi. A 19-year analysis of almost 39,000 women found that those who took dietary supplements including multivitamins, vitamin B6, folic acid, iron, magnesium, zinc and copper were at a higher risk of death than women who did not.
The study was conducted by researchers at the University of Minnesota and the University of Eastern Finland, who believe there's no reason for the average healthyperson to take dietary supplements.
"Based on existing evidence, we see little justification for the general and widespread use of dietary supplements," the authors wrote. "We recommend that they be used with strong medically based cause, such as symptomatic nutrient deficiency disease."
Participants were around age 62 at the start of the study in 1986. Among them, those who took supplements had about a 2.4 percent increased risk of dying over the course of the study, compared with women who didn't take supplements. Only the women who took calcium supplements had a reduced risk of dying.
Doctors Goran Bjelakovic of the University of Nis in Serbia and Christian Gluud of Copenhagen University Hospital in Denmark wrote in an accompanying commentary that the findings "add to the growing evidence demonstrating that certain antioxidant supplements, such as vitamin E, vitamin A and beta-carotene, can be harmful." But they added that vitamin D3 may be beneficial to some older women, and possibly older men.
Rania Batayneh, MPH, nutritionist and owner of Essential Nutrition For You, agreed that while getting nutrients through food is ideal, women may need to supplement their diets with additional calcium and vitamin D3.
"Women
50 and younger need 1,000 daily milligrams of calcium, but most of us can get there with few daily servings of dairy and veggies," she says. 
Batayneh also recommends folic acid for women in their childbearing years, which is found in prenatal supplements. And despite the study, she still thinks a good multivitamin is fine for most women and reduces the need for additional supplementing. 
But when possible, "Food really is medicine and there is nothing that compares with a healthy balanced diet," she says.
"Before you pop supplements, first tally how much calcium you get from your typical diet, and then use supplements to make up the difference of what you're missing from food."
it's better to get your nutrients from food.
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...