Dog-Walking Keeps Pregnant Women Fit

Pregnant and looking to keep in shape? Then walk yer dogs, ladies. Yes, Fifi and Fido can keep you moving enough to get in your daily fitness requirements. So says a recent study out of the UK that found that pregnant women that owned dogs were 50% more likely to get the recommended 30 minutes of exercise a day by going for brisk walks.

Researchers at the University of Liverpool looked at over 11,000 pregnant women, and suggested that dog walking may be an important factor in controlling obesity and improving the health of pregnant women overall. While they found no major differences between pet owners and non-pet owners with regard to pregnancy weight, they did note that dog-walkers get more exercise overall. And that's because weight loss or weight maintenance is much more than just a consequence of brisk walking--healthy diet also a major factor.

Adult dog owners have been found to have higher activity levels in general in both the U.S. and Australia, but this is the first time the benefits have been shown in pregnant women. "By not managing their weight and exercise, pregnant women risk unnecessary weight gain, as well as a difficult labor or weight problems for the child in later life," said researcher Dr. Carri Westgarth.

Many women have difficulty losing their pregnancy weight; in fact, I'm sure more than a few can attest to having never regained their pre-pregnancy weight and shape. I believe the secret is in what's done during pregnancy, as well as shortly after giving birth. The more women move while pregnant, the easier it will be to continue after the baby is born.

I also strongly recommend yoga for mamas to be, as I am certain that it help with labor. Working on your flexibility, endurance and pain tolerance with a regular prenatal yoga practice will get you prepared for the big show. Throw in some regular pregnancy massage and you'll be prepped like a champ. Low on the dough? Look for a local massage therapy school--they always need models, and what better than a pregnant mama needing kneading.

So if you are pregnant and you own a pooch--don't relegate all the dog-walking to dad. Take the beast out for at least one brisk walk a day to get in your cardio workout. Throw in a little yoga, and a body rub from time to time, and you'll be ready for the ring on fight-night. Have fun.

Brain Enhancing Healthy Foods

More bad news for junk food, as a recent study published in the journal Neurology shows that elderly people having higher levels of certain vitamins and omega 3 fatty acids in their blood score better on mental acuity tests than those who eat the junk.  Further, researchers found that eating better might even reduce the brain shrinkage associated with with Alzheimer's disease. Booyah!

The study, conducted at Oregon State University, and one of the first of its kind, looked at 104 people at an average age of 87, and specifically measured a wide range of blood nutrient levels (instead of basing results on food questionnaires, which are less precise and less reliable).

"The vitamins and nutrients you get from eating a wide range of fruits, vegetables and fish can be measured in blood biomarkers," said Traber Maret Traber, a principal investigator at the Linus Pauling Institute and study co-author. "I'm a firm believer these nutrients have strong potential to protect your brain and make it work better."

Yes, so am I! I've been preaching for years. Always happy to see the science back up a universal truth--whole, natural foods are healing and health enhancing. We've gone through millions of years of evolution feeding ourselves the foods of the earth--can't think of any Doritos shortages that challenged mankind, can you?

The principle vitamins they found to help neurological health are some of my personal favs--vitamins B, C, D and E, as well as the omega 3 fatty acids--which increased mental quickness and brain size.

Elderly people that had diets high in unnatural and unhealthy foods, like those laden with trans-fats, fared worse on cognitive tests. Although the researchers found that age and education had major effects on cognitive function and brain size, nutrient status accounted for 17% of the variation in scores, and 37% of the differences in brain volume.

Well, what can I say other than...been tellin' ya. Eat well--it'll take you far. This study looked at people with typical American diets--some good, some...well, not so much. But it's not too late to make the switch--in fact, perfect time for the new year. 

I'll leave it to study co-author Gene Bowman of the Oregon Health and Science University to conclude with, "It is very exciting to think that people could potentially stop their brains from shrinking and keep them sharp by adjusting their diet." Indeed.

Younger Generation Eating at Home

Bravo to the younger generation! Millennials have got it right--they're cooking at home. And if you don't know how I feel about that, then you haven't been listening. The most predominant dietary advice I give is to eat whole, natural foods; and in that vein, you're better off preparing those foods at home, than eating out at a restaurant.

According to a survey conducted by Mintel, a market research company, home cooking has become an increasingly popular among younger generations. The survey polled 2,000 adults over the age of 18 and found that 25% of respondents between the ages18-34 said they "love cooking," while only 17% of seniors and Baby Boomers said the same.

The survey also found that 51% of respondents eat at home primarily for dietary reasons, as "homemade meals tend to be healthier than restaurant fare and prepared grocery foods." Nice!

Looks like the younger generation are doing thing the right way for the right reason. I love it. What it means (I hope) is that this practice will be passed down to even younger generations. Millennials seem to be aware of the fast food revolution of their parents era, and are smart enough to connect the poor health dots. Once again  I say bravo to the younger generation. They've got it right when it comes to the way they're eating. Keep up the good health practices, kids--you're going to reap the rewards they offer.

Planet You

You are what you eat has never rung more true.  No, you will not turn into a Twinkie...but the microorganisms in your gut respond and change according to what you eat.  So says a recent study out of the University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine that showed changes in diet can affect the virus populations that live in your gut.

"Our bodies are like coral reefs, inhabited by many diverse creatures interacting with each other and with us," senior author Frederic Bushman.

The researchers looked at gut virus populations of six volunteers assigned to eat either a high-fat/low-fiber diet, a low-fat/high-fiber diet or an ad-lib diet.  The researchers analyzed DNA from viruses in the stool of the participants over eight days and found that the largest variation in virus diversity occurred between individuals. However, virus populations among participants who ate the same diet became more similar over time.

"The study provides a new window on the vast viral populations that live in the human gut, demonstrates that they vary radically between individuals, and shows that dietary changes can affect not just bacterial populations but also viral populations," Bushman said.

This is an interesting study, because we know how important diet is to the overall health.  What we eat affects our physiology in action, and in environment.  In fact, if we think of our body as an ecosystem as much as an individual organism (not unlike the earth, or a galaxy for that matter!), we can see the impact our food choices make on the environment and the organisms within us.

It is tempting to think of all viruses and bacteria as bad or undesirable, but we live in symbiosis with these microorganisms--they are as important to us as digesters (among other things) as we are to them as food and lodgings.  By controlling the substances you put into your body, you are essentially controlling pollution in your internal atmosphere.  If you regularly pollute your inner environment--and not just with what you eat, mind you, but with what you breathe, snort, inject, whatever--you not only effect the intestinal flora, but every cell in your body.

Listen, natural health advocates have been saying this  for years: Watch what you put into your body.  Give it wholesome foods, natural juices and fresh, clean drinking water, and your body will respond by remaining an oasis--lush, fertile, and full of life.  Pollute it with garbage and that's what it will become--a cesspool.  It will become that to such a degree that it will change you, as it will every cell in your body...and it will also change the life forms residing within your body, because you are an ecosystem, a planet if you will.  Treat your planet as if it's your body, and vice versa--and you and your viruses should live in mutual satisfaction for millions of microbe generations.

Rapid Weight Loss Confusion

Listen up wrestlers, boxers, body builders, brides to be and anybody else who makes a habit of losing significant weight quickly--rapid weight loss can lead to mental confusion.  Aw big deal, right?  Yes, it is--it could mean the difference between a win or loss, increase your risk of injury , or even be a matter of life and death!

Researchers at Cal State Fullerton recently looked at 16 collegiate wrestlers to determine if losing weight rapidly before a match had negative strength implications.  But what they found might have surprised them: although they found no changes in strength, the wrestlers that lost 4% or more of their body mass had significantly higher levels of confusion on the day of the competition.  No increased confusion was observed in those who lost less than 4% body mass.  No wrestler lost more than 8% of their body mass (avg. wt. loss = 6 lbs).  The study is published in the April issue of the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research.

So you might be wondering why anybody needs to lose weight quickly.  Fighters must 'weigh-in' before each bout, so it is common to lose weight right before the match or weigh-in, to come in lighter than their actual weight.  This has the advantage of fighting a smaller opponent if you can get your weight below a certain level.  In fact, most of the wrestlers in the study lost nearly all their weight in the two days before the match.  (They were allowed to choose the desired amount of weight to lose before the match, using methods such as exercise, calorie restriction and fluid deprivation).

The drawbacks were not benign.  According to researchers, "a sport which requires split-second decision making, a higher state of confusion and tension can detrimentally affect the wrestler's performance."  No kidding.

Lots of people want to lose weight overnight.  Shows like The Biggest Loser only perpetuate that desire, as they demonstrate how effective rapid weight loss under controlled conditions can be.  But for the most part, rapid weight loss can be dangerous.  Most people that lose weight rapidly gain it back quickly, and the physiological changes that go along with this type of weight loss can have deleterious effects on the body--cardiovascular, neurological and mental.

I never understand when clients tell me they expect their latest weight loss plan (diet or exercise program) to net them 100 lbs. in a year or less.

What?!?! 

Yes, a year or less.

You are crazy--first it probably won't happen and second, you don't want it to.  A pound a week is healthy; 50 lbs in a year.  But they are convinced.

I'm not suggesting that this study has anything to do with the type of weight loss I just describe, but it does have a correlation.  Simple--any super-rapid weight loss is going to have physiological effects.  Now extrapolate that to "if it has short-term effects in athletes, what does it do over the long-term in the obese?"  I think that's a question worth asking.

Chiropractic Clients are Healthier

http://www.drnickcampos.com/

When it comes to healthy lifestyle behaviors, regular bodywork is right up there with good diet and exercise.  And in the realm of bodywork, nothing beats chiropractic for keeping people healthy and full functioning throughout their lifetime.

According to a 2000 wellness study,

Chiropractic patients ages 65 and older who were under chiropractic care for five or more years experienced 50 percent fewer medical provider visits than their comparable peers and spent only 31 percent of the national average for health care services.  The health habits of patients receiving maintenance care were better overall than the general population, including decreased use of cigarettes and decreased use of prescription drugs.

I hope Obamacare bureaucrats are paying attention. 

Chronic Constipation in Children on Rise

Too many kids are having to be treated for chronic constipation.  Gastroenterologists at Johns Hopkins Children's Center report a 30% rise in these cases from 2008-2009, leading the center to open a new clinic to provide medical and behavioral therapy for children with the condition.

Constipation in children can be from poor diet and lack of activity, but the most likely cause, particularly as it relates to the current increases, is drinking too little water.  As I have pointed out previously in this blog, proper water intake is important for a multitude of metabolic processes, one being digestion and elimination.  Remember, the human body is highly intelligent; provide it with insufficient material and it will shunt what it needs, taking from one area to give to another.  Take in too little water and watch your body steal from your colon to give to other, more vital, regions.

Why are children not drinking enough water?  Gotta ask the parents.  But one thing I know for sure, being one of the most soda-consuming nations, the U.S. has plenty of children that get their fluids from liquid sugar.  Oh well.  Gotta wise up, folks; there's always a price to pay.  Drink soda, your kid will drink soda.  Your kid drinks soda, he or she will probably bypass drinking water.  Bypass drinking water, say hello to constipation.  Cause, effect.  Your choice.

Signs of constipation in children is very often missed by parents, and it can lead to a severe or chronic case.  Things to look for are abdominal bloating and a feeling of fullness; straining with bowel movements; lumpy or hard stools and/or small pellet-like stools, accompanied by a feeling of incomplete emptying of the bowels.  Children with serious constipation may also refuse to go to the toilet for fear it will hurt; they may hide to go in a private place, or experience underwear soiling and bedwetting.  Knowing these signs can help you figure out if your child is suffering.

Finally, make sure your kid is drinking plenty of water.  Dump the soda (for yourself, too) and make water your drink of choice.  Or deal with chronic constipation if that's what you'd prefer.

More O-BS-ity Madness

OK, OK...now that genetics is out as a cultural crutch for obesity, here goes something to quickly take its place.  Get this: Childhood obesity might be linked to the common cold virus.  Yes, yes, the common cold.  Not lifestyle behaviors, but a virus.  How's that for quick thinking?

A recent study to be published in the September 20 issue of Pediatrics showed that some children infected by adenovirus 36 (AD36), which causes the common cold and slight gastrointestinal upset, were an average of 50 pounds heavier than children who hadn't been infected by this particular strain.  The study, small and rife with coincidences, is the latest in "take-the-blame-off-the-patient" obesity hypotheses.

The study looked at 124 children between the ages of 8-18, with more than 50% (67 total) considered obese based on body-mass measurements for their age and gender, and found that nearly one in four obese children had been infected with AD36, compared to only 7% of non-obese children.  In total, the numbers are 15 and 4 respectively--this makes a study?  Further, within the entire group of obese children, those who were AD36-positive weighed about 35 pounds more than obese children who hadn't been infected with AD36.

I repeat, this makes a study?  Now granted, the authors do not claim to have proof, but I laugh at the absurdity of the notion from the start.  Why not study the link between biting one's fingernails and developing hemorrhoids?  Seriously.

OK, I get the rationale, but come on!  Whether or not, a child has been infected with adenovirus does not remove the necessity to watch the diet and to be active, plain and simple.

But we musn't blame people. Why the hell not?  Why perpetuate the ultimate problem: the lack of knowledge, understanding, discipline and responsibility?  Here's why.  Hypotheses lead to further studies, connections lead to rationales, and rationales lead to drug and vaccine development--think anti-depressants.  New drugs for epidemics means a shipload of money.  The public gets a new wonder drug, doctors get more business, and government gets to look like it supports the public health by endorsing poppycock.

So the rest of us get a good five years of having to hear how people are fat because they'd at one time caught a cold; a particular cold; a fat cold.  And we get to pay even more for their health care, because it's not their fault and everyone should be entitled to be an ignorant, irresponsible and undisciplined glutton.  We support you...literally.

Now before I get accused of being insensitive to obese people, remember, I'm the first to say be whatever you want to be.  I have nothing against obesity, ignorance, irresponsibility or a lack of discipline, because I know that everyone has these same characteristics somewhere in their lives.  In fact, I have said in this very blog and in my health articles that I am more an advocate for people loving who they are as they are, even if obese, as long as if they want to change, they take the responsibility to do so on their own.  No BS, no excuses, just take the leap and accept the glory and the blame.

But I do not support removing personal responsibility from one's physical health and well-being; and I definitely do not support the use of so-called science to find further reason to move the blame away from the individual.  To answer one of the study's authors, who thinks we should "move away from assigning blame, and broaden the way we think about obesity," I say, it help much less to give people another crutch to simply rationalize reality: It takes hard work and a drastic change in lifestyle to lose weight and keep it off.  You've got to cut the sodas, work out, and keep the overeating in check.

Trying to pass off the notion that obesity is somehow caused by exposure to the common cold is irresponsible, and in my mind, an obvious attempt at creating the next blockbuster drug.  It's a free market, yes--but will it change the world's obesity profile?  Fat chance.

Vitamins Do the Trick?

When it comes to preventing cancer, are nutritional supplements effective?  Some say yes, some say no.  There is, however, a superior way to prevent cancer nutritionally--by eating healthy foods.  You don't say?  Yes, nothing beats whole natural foods when it comes to dietary health.

Recent studies have shown that neither vitamins C nor E did the trick in preventing cancer or heart disease when taken as supplements.  However, we know how important these vitamins are for proper function.  So what's the deal?  Well, as I point out in my book, The Six Keys to Optimal Health, there is no substitute for real food.  C'mon folks, we haven't found the magic pill yet that can replace food in providing either energy or nutrients (necessary as co-factors in metabolic processes).

Saying that, though, I am not yet convinced that nutritional supplements are useless.  In the big Women's Health Study and the Physicians' Health Study II, which provided the most damning case against supplements, one must admit the doses for vitamin C, at least, were very low (500 mg).  I personally take 2000 mg per day.  I will contend that 500 mg, while not useless, is probably too low to show such dramatic effects as preventing cancer or heart disease.

Remove vitamin C from the diet, though, and watch your health deteriorate.  Hmm, so what then?  Vitamin C is necessary but only valuable when coming from real food?  I don't think so.  We must remember that supplements are just that--supplementing the diet.  Like exercise alone not guaranteeing good health, when combined with diet, rest, chiropractic care, sufficient water intake, and so on, you better believe it will increase your chances of experiencing optimal health.

So preventing cancer, I am certain, requires more than just supplementing.  True, studying each individual vitamin and minerals' individual effects on the body is valuable.  But I think before we throw the baby out with the bath water, we might need to design more rigorous studies to learn the whole truth.

I am a firm believer in the healing and preventative power whole natural foods.  But I know that we need vital nutrients.  It can't be possible that supplementing with compounds containing the same molecules as natural foods is folly.  Unless there are synergistic reactions that occur with other, as of yet, undiscovered agents...well, it just doesn't make sense.  We know certain things about antioxidants in general, and the vitamins that fill that role specifically, so I'm thinking better studies are needed.

But forget not the principle--without healthy, whole natural foods as a staple in your diet, you won't be preventing cancer or general malnutrition by simply swallowing a pill.

Omega-3 Imbalance Leads to Obesity Inheritance

Finally a genetic excuse for obesity that actually makes sense.  Researchers show that an omega fatty acid imbalance can lead to obesity.  But even more interesting is that this imbalance, and the associated obesity, can be passed on from generation to generation.

A recent French study looked at the role of omega intake and fat deposition in mice.  Four generations of mice were fed a 35% fat diet with an omega imbalance now common in much of the developed world--that is, a high ratio of omega-6 fatty acids relative to omega-3s.  The results were progressively fatter mice at birth, generation after generation.

In my book, The Six Keys to Optimal Health, I discuss the importance of bringing the omega balance to 1:2 omega-6:omega-3.  Currently the typical imbalance in western cultures is 15:1 in much of Europe and up to 40:1 in the United States.  Omega-3s are important to many functions including cholesterol balance, blood pressure, reducing heart disease and stroke, preventing blood clots, preventing diabetes and much, much more.

Omega-3 fatty acids are found plentifully in fish and flax oils, although fish liver oils are a more potent source.  Omega-6s, on the other hand, are high in vegetable oils, breads, grains and poultry--things we eat copiously in the typical American diet.

But what about passing fatness on to successive generations?  Experts believe that the link between omega imbalance and obesity is epigenetic; in other words, the imbalance in mothers influences an offspring's genes during development.  Whoa!  That's right--the omega-6:omega-3 ratio in the breast milk of American women has gone from an average of 6:1 to 18:1.  Holy milkshakes!  Exactly.

I recommend a few things to bring the omega ratio back into healthy balance.  First and foremost is reducing your intake of high omega-6 containing foods.  So breads, high carbs, vegetable oil--cut 'em.  Then I suggest you supplement with a good omega-3 fatty acid.  I carry a great brand in my Los Angeles, Beverly Hills and West Hollywood chiropractic office.  Check this article for all the information you need on omega-3 fatty acids.

Stop the cycle of obesity in your family--get your omega fatty acids balanced.  And don't think it's too late for your children, either.  Feed them well (healthily, not in hordes), get them moving, and give them omega-3 fatty acids--that should break the inheritance pattern.  Remember, health starts in the home.  Now how's that for epigenetics!

New Way: Breast Cancer Can Be Avoided

Get this: Up to one third of breast cancer cases can be avoided through diet and fitness. You don't say? Yes! Eating less and exercising more can reduce the incidence of breast cancer, said experts at the European breast cancer conference in Barcelona yesterday.

Although better treatments, early diagnosis and mammogram screenings have dramatically slowed breast cancer, researchers estimate that 25 to 30 percent of cases could be avoided if women were thinner and exercised more. The numbers come from the International Agency for Research on Cancer, which is part of the World Health Organization (WHO). In fact, the WHO estimates that one third of ALL the world's cancers are preventable.

Please digest this, people: Cancers are preventable. Hmm. One more time: Cancers are preventable. Geez...

Is this concept a part of our new world health order? Not yet, too avant garde. Let me point out the discrepancy between current medical thinking and the most up-to-date health research and information. This should make us all rest easy since we now have equal access to medical care. Our country's lawmakers have found it in our best interest to give us more of the system that has brought us medical dependence. We'll call our current system the "old way," and the newer, not yet accepted by medical standards (and this includes the Congress and POTUS) approach, the "new way." Here we go.

New way: "What can be achieved with screening has been achieved. We can't do much more," Carlo La Vecchia, head of epidemiology at the University of Milan, said in an interview. "It's time to move on to other things."

Old way: Any discussion of weight and breast cancer is considered sensitive because some may misconstrue that as the medical establishment blaming women for their disease.

New way: Dr. Michelle Holmes of Harvard University, who has studied cancer and lifestyle factors, said people might wrongly think their chances of getting cancer depend more on their genes than their lifestyle. "The genes have been there for thousands of years, but if cancer rates are changing in a lifetime, that doesn't have much to do with genes," she said.

Old way: Tara Beaumont, a clinical nurse specialist at Breast Cancer Care, a British charity, said her agency has always been careful about giving lifestyle advice. She noted that three of the major risk factors for breast cancer--gender, age and family history--are clearly beyond anyone's control. "It is incredibly difficult to isolate specific factors. Therefore women should in no way feel that they are responsible for developing breast cancer," says Beaumont.

New way: Karen Benn, spokeswoman for Europa Donna, a patient-focused breast cancer group, said it is impossible to ignore the increasingly stronger links between lifestyle and breast cancer. "If we know there are healthier choices, we can't not recommend them just because people might misinterpret the advice and feel guilty," she said. "If we are going to prevent breast cancer, then this message needs to get out, particularly to younger women."

Frickin' duh!

Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women. A woman's chance of developing breast cancer in her lifetime is one in eight. Obese women are 60% more likely to develop any cancer than normal-weight women. Many breast cancers are fueled by estrogen, a hormone produced in fat tissue, so experts suspect that the fatter a woman is, the more estrogen she's likely to produce, which in turn could feed breast cancer. Even in slim women, exercise can help reduce the cancer risk by converting more fat into muscle.

Drinking less alcohol might also help lower the risk. Experts estimate that having more than a couple of drinks a day can boost the risk of breast cancer by 4-10%.

Further, searching for magic bullets is counter-productive. There is no one pill or therapy that will make you healthy and live forever. Please wake up. Women who jumped on hormone replacement therapy to bypass the down-side of menopause increased their risk of developing breast cancer. In the '80s and '90s breast cancer rose steadily as obesity and the use of estrogen-containing hormones after menopause increased.

A sharp drop in breast cancer rates occurred as women abandoned hormone-replacement therapy due to a discovered link between the treatments and breast cancer. Experts said a similar reduction might be seen if women ate healthier and exercised more.

New way: Dr. Michelle Holmes, the Harvard expert, said changing diet and nutrition is arguably easier than tackling other breast cancer risk factors.

Well no shiitake, Samurai! That's the new way; yet, we're still stuck in the old. But at least we're ALL stuck in it together.

Diet and Exercise Better than Smart Drugs

Some people are driven by their bodies, and others by their mind. Despite the age-old argument of whether the two entities are separate and distinct, we know one thing for sure--working out the body does wonders for mental health. Take that, Descartes!

A recent study out of Duke University showed that regular moderate exercise and healthy diet together can improve scores on cognition tests. The four-month study conducted by Duke's nueropsychology department looked at 124 fifty-two year old men and women with high blood pressure (HBP) who were a minimum of 15 pounds overweight, on average. The study was originally designed to look at diet, exercise, and HBP; but the researchers decided to throw in cognitive function as an interesting side investigation.

One third of the participants followed the DASH--Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension--diet, which emphasizes low-fat dairy products, fruits and vegetables, in combination with regular exercise. One third, followed the DASH diet along with a weight-management program and aerobic exercise. The final third went about on their regular dietary and exercise regimens.

The exercise conducted was moderate--30 minutes three to four times a week, "enough to put the heart up to 75 to 80 percent of its maximum rate," as one of the researchers said. The weight-management programs were split between two strategies--one centered on reducing portion size and cutting the snacking habit, while the other focused on appetite awareness training, which provided guidelines on food quantity (how much one ate) as well as food quality (types of food). The cognitive tests focused on executive function, learning and psychomotor speed.

Researchers found that the group that exercised regularly and ate well had an overall 30 percent improvement in mental function by the end of the four-month period. They also lost an average of 19 pounds and lowered systolic blood pressure (the higher of the 120/80 reading) by 16 points and diastolic pressure by 10 points. Shazam! All by diet and exercise.

As one of the researchers concluded, “There are neurochemical changes that happen with exercise. There is increased production of brain-derived neurotrophic factor, which stimulates connection with other brain cells, but also there is some evidence that it helps grow new brain cells.”

On top of that, as I point out in my book, The Six Keys to Optimal Health, regular exercise increases circulation, oxygen and nutrient transport to the brain; it reduces depression and anxiety; and it leads to increased production of phenylethylamine (PEA), which is the body's natural opiates...so it FEELS GOOD! Oh yeah, give it to me, baby!

There you have it: Another study showing the enormous benefits of diet and exercise. Now, before you say, "Big deal, tell me something I don't know," understand that these finding should shed some light on the notion of mass use of nootropic drugs, otherwise known as smart drugs. When 7% of all college students and 20% of polled scientists using them to enhance memory, problem solving, attention, and mental endurance, I think it's time to start discussing alternatives.

No drugs are free of side effects, and the notion of the world's scientists being tweaked out on designer speed is, well....scary (think Norman Osbourne). So that's why I post these seemingly obvious studies. Yes, we all know that diet and exercise have wide-ranging benefits. But then why isn't everybody doing them?

You Control Your Health

Time to get serious, people. Forty percent of all cancers are preventable. Listen up: 4.8 million cancer cases do not have to happen. Get it? You are in charge of your health. Health is NOT random. If you are living by that philosophy, you're sunk.

Is there a health care crisis? You bet. The crisis lies in the idea that you are not responsible for your own health, or your health care. Forty percent of all cancers are preventable. This from a report by the Geneva-based International Union Against Cancer (UICC). As UICC president David Hill says, "If there was an announcement that somebody had discovered a cure for 40 percent of the world's cancers, there would quite justifiably be huge jubilation." No kidding.

OK, so what can you do? First, let's look at the top three cancers:

• Breast (women)/Prostate (men)
  
• Lung
  
• Colon and rectum

What can you do today that can help prevent these cancers tomorrow?

The first thing you want to do is observe your diet. Minimize processed foods, or better yet, get rid of them altogether. Whole and natural is best. Eat lots of fruits and vegetables. Take your vitamins. Drink lots of water (two liters per day, minimum).

Next, minimize or quit smoking. Minimize smoking? Exactly, most people that smoke can't do so moderately, so kick it altogether. Try breathing clean air, too. How about an air purifier? Don't minimize their usefulness. If you own a home in Los Angeles, contact me, I've got a guy that can set you up.

Minimize alcohol, recreational drug, and pharmaceutical drug consumption. These substances are toxins to the body. Stress the liver and kidneys and you'll be increasing your cancer risk (among other illnesses) exponentially. Alcohol can cause many different forms of cancer--2-4% of all cancers to be exact--including esophageal, stomach, liver, breast, colon and others. And don't underestimate the drugs your doctor gives you; they're poisons, too.

Maintain a healthy weight. I'm not one to lay on the guilt trips, so simply put, if you are overweight, just lower it by something. My dad dropped from 225 to 190. He's still about 25 pounds overweight, but that drop he made was significant to his health.

Exercise regularly. C'mon now, if you are not doing this you are missing out on so many health benefits that, well...you've got nobody to blame but...OK, no guilt trips. Just do it.

Get plenty of healthy sun, but don't overdo it. Listen, we all need the vitamin D, and we now know more than ever how much so. But sun worshiping, tanning beds, Jersey Shore...puleeze! Be smart, protect yourself--safe sunning is the only way to go.

There you have it: You are in control of your health. Health is not random. There is a health care crisis, and it's that far too many people neglect some very basic health enhancing behaviors. My book, The Six Keys to Optimal Health, has these and hundreds of other tips to prevent cancer and live a life of health and vitality. You can direct your health: you are responsible for the health you have and maintaining it. Nobody else.

My Daughter Takes Kids Vitamins

Most everybody knows that I place a high importance of supplementing with vitamins. I think it's pretty impossible for the average person to get the full amount of nutrients they need from food alone. It's possible but unlikely.

So if I think adults need to take vitamins, do you think I feel it's necessary for children, too? You bet I do; so I make sure my children take their daily vitamins as a supplement to their healthy diets. I like Jarrow Kids Multi because they taste good, and Jarrow products have exactly what their label says they do. They've been tested by a third party organization, so I know I'm giving my children the best.

If you want to make sure your children are getting the best nutrition possible, consider supplementing their healthy diets with vitamins. You'll get to see them grow vibrantly into healthy and energetic little beings. That's the greatest gift any parent can ask for.

Parenting Tips for Healthy Eating

Last post I discussed the difficulty some parents have with guiding positive change in their children's behavior with regard to health. For instance, when facing the task of limiting television time, many parents of overweight and obese children lack confidence in laying down the law.

I believe that uncertain parents simply lack a strategy, so last post I outlined a practical strategy for limiting T.V. time for children. It's fair, and it'll work if parents can stick to their guns. But like I pointed out in the post, it might be harder to implement with teenagers, as poor habits get harder to break the older kids get.

As promised, I'm posting some tips on establishing healthy eating habits for families. This was another area parents of overweight and obese kids lacked confidence in implementing. Some basic rules apply* when it comes to eating well, and they are:

• Eat primarily whole, natural foods--real food; not processed. Fruits, vegetables, real dairy (yes, butter), real meats, and low-glycemic carbs.
• Eat primarily at home. Eating out, no matter how healthy it seems, is still inferior to cooking at home. Believe that.
• Cut out soda--worst damn crap you can put into your body.
• Minimize the desserts--I know this is hard with kids, but you've got to keep the portions small. Two cookies (small to medium size) three times per week, and something more involved (cake, ice cream, whatever) one time per week is plenty to excessive. If you can avoid developing the habit from the start, even better. My daughter Delilah gets a small cup of ice cream once a week--that's it; she doesn't know any different.
• Keep portions moderate--it's my opinion that massive portions are the greatest contributor to obesity. Most Americans don't need half the food they are consuming. Bring it down, big boy.

That's it. Simple. But, as I've said before, this will be much harder to implement with teenagers. Teens have enough independence to make their own food choices throughout the day. This one simple fact may make it impossible to completely change their bad eating habits--the same one we've all had at that time in our lives.

But it's the little kids we can influence. They may still move toward unhealthy diets as teenagers, but I guarantee you by the time they go to college they'll remember what you've taught them as children, and return to eating that way. Guaranteed.

So that's a lot of responsibility you have parents. You can be soft and uncertain, or you can be firm and certain that you are teaching your children good habits which will last them a lifetime. Your decisions now, as well as your challenges, will shape their future. They'll thank you for it one day. I'm certain of that.

*For a more comprehensive list of healthy eating tips, read my book, The Six Keys to Optimal Health.

Ockham's Razor**

What's the best way to combat an obesity epidemic? Have insurance companies--or better yet, the government--pay for gastric bypass surgeries. You heard me right, let somebody else pick up the tab for one's disregard. At least that's what some crackpot lawmakers want to do.

According to a recent story, the obesity epidemic may throw a wrench in President Barack Obama's universal health plan. I couldn't agree more. Throw in a few professional patients, and a few more prescription drug addicts, and I think the President's plan is in for a world of hurt. How do I know? Because that's exactly why health care costs are currently out of control. We're all paying for the "sick care" of the relatively few.

But fear not--one New Hampshire politician has it all figured out. Turns out all of State Senator Bob Clegg's health troubles went away following his gastric bypass surgery in 2007. The surgery helped him deflate from a whopping 380 to a respectable 240 lbs. Not bad, Senator, not bad. So he believes this must be the answer: Government funded gastric bypass--or at least have the surgery covered by private medical insurance. He's so convinced of it's effectiveness, that he authored a bill in January 2008 requiring New Hampshire insurers to offer surgery as a treatment option, just as the state's Medicaid program for the poor does. Apparently other states are looking at the "Live Free or Die" credo of New Hampshire and taking it literally. But to take it one step further, some think that the law should be extended federally.

All I can say is, "Oy vey!" Senator, Senator, Senator...you are wrong, dead wrong. Why should taxpayers pay for an elective surgery? Let me be frank, sir: Obesity--despite what some enablers in the medical and psychology field may wish us to believe--is not a disease. Not. It's a condition. One that is mainly the result of lack--lack of information, lack of understanding, lack of discipline, lack of responsibility, and lack of accountability.

In my book, The Six Keys to Optimal Health, I say very clearly to people battling their weight, "You have the power to overcome obesity; it's in you." I also say run--don't walk--away from anybody who tells you that you are not in complete control of your weight. Run! Run from New Hampshire, and run from Senator Bob Clegg cuz' that man's dangerous. Implying that obesity is a disease that needs surgical intervention* (paid for by you and me in taxes and insurance premiums) is the road to hell. Here's the laugh: Clegg's impetus to pull the wool over New Hampshire's eyes was that he had to pay $20,000 out of his own pocket. His rationale: he's saving the state $3,000 per month in doctor's visits.

Hey, I've got no beef with that...if it were reality. But it's not. Clegg could have lost the weight himself through diet and exercise. No? Don't think so? Sorry, The Biggest Loser proves it. That T.V. show has single-handedly buried any hope for the "I just can't lose weight no matter what I try" set...definitively. Have you seen the show, Clegg? It's incredible. Slap in the face of perpetual victims. If anybody reading this hasn't seen Biggest Loser yet--one of the best shows on T.V. as well as an unexpected public health phenomenon--you simply must. If you can't stomach T.V., then at least check out the website, especially the before and after photos. Disease my arse. The contestants of the show do it purely with diet and exercise--the only way to lose weight effectively. I hope the former Senator's dangerous bill gets no farther than New Hampshire.

*I'm not against gastric bypass surgery, at all. I just don't want to pay for yours, as I'm sure you don't want to pay for my penis enlargement.

**Thank you to a great client and regular reader, Kelly D.

Healthy, Healthy Japan

They say that the Japanese are the healthiest people alive. They live on average 74.5 years in health, and 86 years thereafter. The Japanese diet--high in fish, rice, and seaweed--is said to be the main reason. Cancer rates are low and heart disease is pretty much held in check. Bravo to the Japanese, especially in honor of their 6th Healthy Food Expo held last week in Tokyo. When it comes to diet and nutrition the Japanese are, without a doubt, ahead of the game.

But if any of you have read my latest book, The Six Keys to Optimal Health, you know that diet is just one factor determining a person's health and longevity. Multiple factors play a role, each having a profound effect on health and life expectancy. One of these factors is a balanced mental and emotional life--that is, one's mental health.

When it comes to mental health, then, the Japanese may not be so ahead of the game after all. According to a government report released last week, suicides from work-related stress has doubled in the last five years. And the number of people developing work-related mental conditions such as depression has reached a record high of 268 in 2006 (the last year of complete statistics on the subject). Japan has one of the highest suicide rates in the world--32,160 people killed themselves in 2006. People in their 30s and 40s were most prone to stress due to working too many hours or personal relationships at work. Some of the people attempting suicide worked 160 hours of overtime a month. 160 hours overtime! The typical work week in Japan is 40 hours.

Dang! That's whole lot of workaholism. And you thought Americans were bad. Listen, what difference does it make if you eat well and are nutritionally healthy if you drive yourself into the grave by overworking? Just doesn't make sense. I get that there are pressures: one-third of these poor people were working between 80-100 hours overtime a month! Put this in perspective: That's twelve or more hours a day for five straight days every week. That's damn near chiropractic hours. Sheesh. What family time? What social life? What time for personal hygiene (I know if that was me, I'd probably quit cutting the ol' toenails to gain a few minutes every week). And throw in a little cultural mind trip--many people don't discuss their stress in order to not seem weak--and you've got a severe mental health issue at hand.

The bottom line is this: If you strive for good health you can't neglect your mental and emotional wellbeing. Eating well is essential, but so is balancing one's mental perspective. You ain't gonna do that by working non-stop for extended periods. You need rest, social time, creative time, family time, and simply time to be alone with your thoughts. Sometimes we forget how important alone time actually is. And even if you do all this stuff regularly, you need a vacation every once in a while, too. Trust me when I say that burning the candle at both ends when it comes to work is the quickest way to burnout, and worse. Just ask the Japanese--it a national tragedy over there.

Flawed Paradigm or Religious Propoganda?

I get most of my health news off the news wires like Reuters or Associated Press. For anyone not familiar with these news outlets, they provide stories for use by newspapers, radio and television programs and other media outlets. It comes over as a "just-the-facts" piece that other writers can use to create a story, which essentially leaves the writer to choose how the story is told without losing its essential meaning and information.

So, as you can probably tell, I have a blast getting these facts-only stories and sending them back out with what I consider a more realistic twist. I know that nobody reading this believes for a second that the information we get over traditional outlets is the whole truth and nothing but the truth. It's not about being a born skeptic as much as it's about having way too many experiences of being told one thing but seeing another that makes us question what we are told.

Take for example the latest news being reported in the Annals of Behavioral Medicine, which says that people who take a proactive approach to their health may, in fact, be better informed, but by no means are they necessarily more healthy. Now, when I see opening words of this sort, along with the headline, "Involved" patients not always healthier, I get an immediate chuckle. I chuckle because I know that either, one: they are providing faulty information; or two: they are defining terms a little differently than I would. I know this because I read the health news every day. I know that studies pour out every week showing that a proactive approach of incorporating healthy lifestyle habits is, without a doubt, the number one beneficial thing people can do to ensure better health and a longer life. But, then, stories like this one come out and, well...they make me chuckle.

So, according to this study, 189 people with high blood pressure were observed: Those people who wanted a greater say in their health care tended to have higher blood pressure and cholesterol than the people who let their doctors have most of the control. Oy vey. And the conclusion of the research team was that, "merely being involved in health care decisions does not necessarily make patients healthier."

Well no ship, Sherlock.

Here are the flaws with these conclusions: First, being proactive goes way beyond "being informed." Could you imagine if we extrapolated that idea--that is, considering simply being informed the same as being proactive--to voting (I'm informed but I don't vote), to our work life (I went to college but I prefer not to work), or to our finances (I know I should save, pay my taxes, and my bills...but I don't). We can all appreciate that proactivity is taking action--in the realm of health it's exercise, adopting a healthy diet, regular bodywork, getting enough sleep, and so on, and so forth.

The second flaw of this study is that they used high blood pressure--hardly a measure of health, and more accurately a measure of potential disease--as the health parameter. People who have high blood pressure are already on the verge of illness. Please. Aren't they already doing something wrong or neglecting to do some things right? And these are the folks we should use as our reference point that "simply being informed doesn't lead people to be healthier"? How amusing. I really could go on for hours about the absurdity of this notion.

Studies like this are an unfortunate relic of the old health paradigm that I am so proactively trying to get you to abandon. That paradigm says, health is a chance occurrence and is fleeting. In other words, illness is inevitable (I've got no argument there) and only through medical intervention can you hope to stand a chance of survival (this, however, is false). Obviously, that message is not presented so blatantly, but you'll find it if you simply read between the lines.

And this is exactly how powerful institutions attempt to control you. Just ask any major religion outside of the Church of Medical Science and they'll tell you: It all starts with brainwashing. You need us. We've saved hundreds of millions of lives, and we save millions more every year; we're here to save you. This has been propagandized for years; nothing new there. But the next step is to tell you that you can't make it without said religion. Don't meddle when it comes to your health; we know what we're doing; we know your health and your body better than you do, and we're here to save you. That's where we are now. The third step is mandating conformity. Mandatory treatments, mandatory inoculations, mandatory obedience. We're just starting to get a glimpse of this practice now. Hang on, we should be seeing much more of this in the future.

Then the break occurs; the unfoldment of upheaval. It has happened in every major revolt in history, including the American Revolution. And now, we are in the midst of a health paradigm revolution. Damn, I feel like Thomas Paine!

Here's the bottom line: people who take a proactive approach to their health and well-being stand an exceptionally high chance of having better health, period. Proactivity means, "acting in advance to deal with an expected difficulty." Acting. Not just being informed. Big difference.

Although this study comes to one very true conclusion, that "studies have found that patients generally tend to do better when they agree with their doctors on how to manage their health problems." This, however, is not the same thing as people taking a proactive approach to their health. For sure, it helps when doctor and patient are on the same page; however, I highly doubt that anyone sets out to deliberately challenge one's doctor when one's health is on the line. But in an era of medical mistakes, profiteering, and just plain incompetency, where 98,000 people a year die as a result of medical errors (not accidents, not natural acts, but mistakes)...then yeah, people will question. And that, in my opinion, is highly proactive.

Widely-Used Medicine Kills 22,000

Just another very big reason to take care of your health while you still have it: Magic bullets don't always work; and often, they can turn deadly. Take for instance the latest news coming out of the 60 Minutes newsroom. In an interview to be aired next Sunday, a medical researcher has disclosed that 22,000 lives were lost due to complications of a drug used to stem bleeding during open heart surgeries.

According to researcher Dr. Dennis Mangano, an observational study he conducted showed that the drug Trasylol, manufactured by Bayer AG, was linked to kidney failure and death. The scary part is that Trasylol, one of the most widely-used drugs of its kind, was used on one-third of all open heart surgeries during the drug's "height". Worse yet, in his study, Dr. Mangano recommended discontinuing the use of Trasylol and that the drug be recalled. Doh!

But wait, it gets better: Bayer, the German pharmaceutical company, well-known for its aspirin, also knew of the link between Trasylol and kidney disease...but withheld the information from the FDA. Nice. Cha-Ching!

Once again, just another big reason to take care of your health now. Your heart needs proper caring and maintenance--through diet and exercise--just like all your organs do. Yeah, I know we all know this--but is everyone doing what they need to do in order to keep their hearts ticking? If you're not, then you're flirting with disaster. Just imagine going in for a heart bypass and coming out with dialysis. The major point here is that nobody is going to care for your health as much as you do. Period. Some companies will have no remorse to make money at the expense of your safety--you'd better believe it. So if you don't care for your heart like its your most valuable asset, then don't expect anybody else to, either--not Bayer; not your surgeon; not your insurance agent; not your Congressman; not your next President, no matter who that might be; not anyone. You'd better believe that.