For the sake of convenience: Commercial sources of prebiotic fibers

Our efforts to obtain prebiotic fibers/resistant starches, as discussed in the Cureality Digestive Health Track, to cultivate healthy bowel flora means recreating the eating behavior of primitive humans who dug in the dirt with sticks and bone fragments for underground roots and tubers, behaviors you can still observe in extant hunter-gatherer groups, such as the Hadza and Yanomamo. But, because this practice is inconvenient for us modern folk accustomed to sleek grocery stores, because many of us live in climates where the ground is frozen much of the year, and because we lack the wisdom passed from generation to generation that helps identify which roots and tubers are safe to eat and which are not, we rely on modern equivalents of primitive sources. Thus, green, unripe bananas, raw potatoes and other such fiber sources in the Cureality lifestyle.

There is therefore no need to purchase prebiotic fibers outside of your daily effort at including an unripe green banana, say, or inulin and fructooligosaccharides (FOS), or small servings of legumes as a means of cultivating healthy bowel flora. These are powerful strategies that change the number and species of bowel flora over time, thereby leading to beneficial health effects that include reduced blood sugar and blood pressure, reduction in triglycerides, reduced anxiety and improved sleep, and reduced colon cancer risk.

HOWEVER, convenience can be a struggle. Traveling by plane, for example, makes lugging around green bananas or raw potatoes inconvenient. Inulin and FOS already come as powders or capsules and they are among the options for a convenient, portable prebiotic fiber strategy. But there are others that can be purchased. This is a more costly way to get your prebiotic fibers and you do not need to purchase these products in order to succeed in your bowel flora management program. These products are therefore listed strictly as a strategy for convenience.

Most perspectives on the quality of human bowel flora composition suggest that diversity is an important feature, i.e., the greater the number of species, the better the health of the host. There may therefore be advantage in varying your prebiotic routine, e.g., green banana on Monday, inulin on Tuesday, PGX (below) on Wednesday, etc. Beyond providing convenience, these products may introduce an added level of diversity, as well.

Among the preparations available to us that can be used as prebiotic fibers:

PGX

While it is billed as a weight management and blood sugar-reducing product, the naturally occurring fiber--α-D-glucurono-α-D-manno-β-D-manno- β-D-gluco, α-L-gulurono-β-D mannurono, β-D-gluco-β- D-mannan--in PGX also exerts prebiotic effects (evidenced by increased fecal butyrate, the beneficial end-product of bacterial metabolism). PGX is available as capsules or granules. It also seems to exert prebiotic effects at lower doses than other prebiotic fibers. While I usually advise reaching 20 grams per day of fiber, PGX appears to exert substantial effects at a daily dose of half that quantity. As with all prebiotic fibers, it is best to build up slowly over weeks, e.g., start at 1.5 grams twice per day. It is also best taken in two or three divided doses. (Avoid the PGX bars, as they are too carb-rich for those of us trying to achieve ideal metaobolic health.)

Prebiotin

A combination of inulin and FOS available as powders and in portable Stick Pacs (2 gram and 4 gram packs). This preparation is quite costly, however, given the generally low cost of purchasing chicory inulin and FOS separately.

Acacia

Acacia fiber is another form of prebiotic fiber.  RenewLife and NOW are two reputable brands.

Isomalto-oligosaccharides

This fiber is used in Quest bars and in Paleo Protein Bars. With Quest bars, choose the flavors without sucralose, since it has been associated with undesirable changes in bowel flora.

There you go. It means that there are fewer and fewer reasons to not purposefully cultivate healthy bowel flora and obtain all the wonderful health benefits of doing so, from reduced blood pressure, to reduced triglycerides, to deeper sleep.

Disclaimer: I am not compensated in any way by discussing these products.

How Not To Have An Autoimmune Condition


Autoimmune conditions are becoming increasingly common. Estimates vary, but it appears that at least 8-9% of the population in North America and Western Europe have one of these conditions, with The American Autoimmune Related Diseases Association estimating that it’s even higher at 14% of the population.

The 200 or so autoimmune diseases that afflict modern people are conditions that involve an abnormal immune response directed against one or more organs of the body. If the misguided attack is against the thyroid gland, it can result in Hashimoto’s thyroiditis. If it is directed against pancreatic beta cells that produce insulin, it can result in type 1 diabetes or latent autoimmune diabetes of adults (LADA). If it involves tissue encasing joints (synovium) like the fingers or wrists, it can result in rheumatoid arthritis. It if involves the liver, it can result in autoimmune hepatitis, and so on. Nearly every organ of the body can be the target of such a misguided immune response.

While it requires a genetic predisposition towards autoimmunity that we have no control over (e.g., the HLA-B27 gene for ankylosing spondylitis), there are numerous environmental triggers of these diseases that we can do something about. Identifying and correcting these factors stacks the odds in your favor of reducing autoimmune inflammation, swelling, pain, organ dysfunction, and can even reverse an autoimmune condition altogether.

Among the most important factors to correct in order to minimize or reverse autoimmunity are:


Wheat and grain elimination

If you are reading this, you likely already know that the gliadin protein of wheat and related proteins in other grains (especially the secalin of rye, the hordein of barley, zein of corn, perhaps the avenin of oats) initiate the intestinal “leakiness” that begins the autoimmune process, an effect that occurs in over 90% of people who consume wheat and grains. The flood of foreign peptides/proteins, bacterial lipopolysaccharide, and grain proteins themselves cause immune responses to be launched against these foreign factors. If, for instance, an autoimmune response is triggered against wheat gliadin, the same antibodies can be aimed at the synapsin protein of the central nervous system/brain, resulting in dementia or cerebellar ataxia (destruction of the cerebellum resulting in incoordination and loss of bladder and bowel control). Wheat and grain elimination is by far the most important item on this list to reverse autoimmunity.

Correct vitamin D deficiency

It is clear that, across a spectrum of autoimmune diseases, vitamin D deficiency serves a permissive, not necessarily causative, role in allowing an autoimmune process to proceed. It is clear, for instance, that autoimmune conditions such as type 1 diabetes in children, rheumatoid arthritis, and Hashimoto’s thyroiditis are more common in those with low vitamin D status, much less common in those with higher vitamin D levels. For this and other reasons, I aim to achieve a blood level of 25-hydroxy vitamin D level of 60-70 ng/ml, a level that usually requires around 4000-8000 units per day of D3 (cholecalciferol) in gelcap or liquid form (never tablet due to poor or erratic absorption). In view of the serious nature of autoimmune diseases, it is well worth tracking occasional blood levels.

Supplement omega-3 fatty acids

While omega-3 fatty acids, EPA and DHA, from fish oil have proven only modestly helpful by themselves, when cast onto the background of wheat/grain elimination and vitamin D, omega-3 fatty acids compound anti-inflammatory benefits, such as those exerted via cyclooxygenase-2. This requires a daily EPA + DHA dose of around 3600 mg per day, divided in two. Don’t confuse EPA and DHA omega-3s with linolenic acid, another form of omega-3 obtained from meats, flaxseed, chia, and walnuts that does not not yield the same benefits. Nor can you use krill oil with its relatively trivial content of omega-3s.

Eliminate dairy

This is true in North America and most of Western Europe, less true in New Zealand and Australia. Autoimmunity can be triggered by the casein beta A1 form of casein widely expressed in dairy products, but not by casein beta A2 and other forms. Because it is so prevalent in North America and Western Europe, the most confident way to avoid this immunogenic form of casein is to avoid dairy altogether. You might be able to consume cheese, given the fermentation process that alters proteins and sugar, but that has not been fully explored.

Cultivate healthy bowel flora

People with autoimmune conditions have massively screwed up bowel flora with reduced species diversity and dominance of unhealthy species. We restore a healthier anti-inflammatory panel of bacterial species by “seeding” the colon with high-potency probiotics, then nourishing them with prebiotic fibers/resistant starches, a collection of strategies summarized in the Cureality Digestive Health discussions. People sometimes view bowel flora management as optional, just “fluff”–it is anything but. Properly managing bowel flora can be a make-it-or-break-it advantage; don’t neglect it.

There you go: a basic list to get started on if your interest is to begin a process of unraveling the processes of autoimmunity. In some conditions, such as rheumatoid arthritis and polymyalgia rheumatica, full recovery is possible. In other conditions, such as Hashimoto’s thyroiditis and the pancreatic beta cell destruction leading to type 1 diabetes, reversing the autoimmune inflammation does not restore organ function: hypothyroidism results after thyroiditis quiets down and type 1 diabetes and need for insulin persists after pancreatic beta cell damage. But note that the most powerful risk factor for an autoimmune disease is another autoimmune disease–this is why so many people have more than one autoimmune condition. People with Hashimoto’s, for instance, can develop rheumatoid arthritis or psoriasis. So the above menu is still worth following even if you cannot hope for full organ recovery

Five Powerful Ways to Reduce Blood Sugar

Left to conventional advice on diet and you will, more than likely, succumb to type 2 diabetes sooner or later. Follow your doctor’s advice to cut fat and eat more “healthy whole grains” and oral diabetes medication and insulin are almost certainly in your future. Despite this, had this scenario played out, you would be accused of laziness and gluttony, a weak specimen of human being who just gave into excess.

If you turn elsewhere for advice, however, and ignore the awful advice from “official” sources with cozy relationships with Big Pharma, you can reduce blood sugars sufficient to never become diabetic or to reverse an established diagnosis, and you can create a powerful collection of strategies that handily trump the worthless advice being passed off by the USDA, American Diabetes Association, the American Heart Association, or the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics.

Among the most powerful and effective strategies to reduce blood sugar:

1) Eat no wheat nor grains

Recall that amylopectin A, the complex carbohydrate of grains, is highly digestible, unlike most of the other components of the seeds of grasses AKA “grains,” subject to digestion by the enzyme, amylase, in saliva and stomach. This explains why, ounce for ounce, grains raise blood sugar higher than table sugar. Eat no grains = remove the exceptional glycemic potential of amylopectin A.

2) Add no sugars, avoid high-fructose corn syrup

This should be pretty obvious, but note that the majority of processed foods contain sweeteners such as sucrose or high-fructose corn syrup, tailored to please the increased desire for sweetness among grain-consuming people. While fructose does not raise blood sugar acutely, it does so in delayed fashion, along with triggering other metabolic distortions such as increased triglycerides and fatty liver.

3) Vitamin D

Because vitamin D restores the body’s normal responsiveness to insulin, getting vitamin D right helps reduce blood sugar naturally while providing a range of other health benefits.

4) Restore bowel flora

As cultivation of several Lactobacillus and Bifidobacteria species in bowel flora yields fatty acids that restore insulin responsiveness, this leads to reductions in blood sugar over time. Minus the bowel flora-disrupting effects of grains and sugars, a purposeful program of bowel flora restoration is required (discussed at length in the Cureality Digestive Health section.)

5) Exercise

Blood sugar is reduced during and immediately following exercise, with the effect continuing for many hours afterwards, even into the next day.

Note that, aside from exercise, none of these powerful strategies are advocated by the American Diabetes Association or any other “official” agency purporting to provide dietary advice. As is happening more and more often as the tide of health information rises and is accessible to all, the best advice on health does not come from such agencies nor from your doctor but from your efforts to better understand the truths in health. This is our core mission in Cureality. A nice side benefit: information from Cureality is not accompanied by advertisements from Merck, Pfizer, Kelloggs, Kraft, or Cadbury Schweppes.

Cureality App Review: Breathe Sync



Biofeedback is a wonderful, natural way to gain control over multiple physiological phenomena, a means of tapping into your body’s internal resources. You can, for instance, use biofeedback to reduce anxiety, heart rate, and blood pressure, and achieve a sense of well-being that does not involve drugs, side-effects, or even much cost.

Biofeedback simply means that you are tracking some observable physiologic phenomenon—heart rate, skin temperature, blood pressure—and trying to consciously access control over it. One very successful method is that of bringing the beat-to-beat variation in heart rate into synchrony with the respiratory cycle. In day-to-day life, the heart beat is usually completely out of sync with respiration. Bring it into synchrony and interesting things happen: you experience a feeling of peace and calm, while many healthy phenomena develop.

A company called HeartMath has applied this principle through their personal computer-driven device that plugs into the USB port of your computer and monitors your heart rate with a device clipped on your earlobe. You then regulate breathing and follow the instructions provided and feedback is obtained on whether you are achieving synchrony, or what they call “coherence.” As the user becomes more effective in achieving coherence over time, positive physiological and emotional effects develop. HeartMath has been shown, for instance, to reduce systolic and diastolic blood pressure, morning cortisol levels (a stress hormone), and helps people deal with chronic pain. Downside of the HeartMath process: a $249 price tag for the earlobe-USB device.

But this is the age of emerging smartphone apps, including those applied to health. Smartphone apps are perfect for health monitoring. They are especially changing how we engage in biofeedback. An app called Breathe Sync is available that tracks heart rate using the camera’s flash on the phone. By tracking heart rate and providing visual instruction on breathing pattern, the program generates a Wellness Quotient, WQ, similar to HeartMath’s coherence scoring system. Difference: Breathe Sync is portable and a heck of a lot less costly. I paid $9.99, more than I’ve paid for any other mainstream smartphone application, but a bargain compared to the HeartMath device cost.

One glitch is that you need to not be running any other programs in the background, such as your GPS, else you will have pauses in the Breathe Sync program, negating the value of your WQ. Beyond this, the app functions reliably and can help you achieve the health goals of biofeedback with so much less hassle and greater effectiveness than the older methods.

If you are looking for a biofeedback system that provides advantage in gaining control over metabolic health, while also providing a wonderful method of relaxation, Breathe Sync, I believe, is the go-to app right now.

Amber’s Top 35 Health and Fitness Tips

This year I joined the 35 club!  And in honor of being fabulous and 35, I want to share 35 health and fitness tips with you! 

1.  Foam rolling is for everyone and should be done daily. 
2.  Cold showers are the best way to wake up and burn more body fat. 
3.  Stop locking your knees.  This will lead to lower back pain. 
4.  Avoid eating gluten at all costs. 
5.  Breath deep so that you can feel the sides or your lower back expand. 
6.  Swing a kettlebell for a stronger and great looking backside. 
7.  Fat is where it’s at!  Enjoy butter, ghee, coconut oil, palm oil, duck fat and many other fabulous saturated fats. 
8.  Don’t let your grip strength fade with age.  Farmer carries, kettlebells and hanging from a bar will help with that. 
9.  Runners, keep your long runs slow and easy and keep your interval runs hard.  Don’t fall in the chronic cardio range. 
10.  Drink high quality spring or reverse osmosis water. 
11.  Use high quality sea salt season food and as a mineral supplement. 
12.  Work your squat so that your butt can get down to the ground.  Can you sit in this position? How long?
13.  Lift heavy weights!  We were made for manual work,.   Simulate heavy labor in the weight room. 
14.  Meditate daily.  If you don’t go within, you will go with out.  We need quiet restorative time to balance the stress in our life. 
15.  Stand up and move for 10 minutes for every hour your sit at your computer. 
16. Eat a variety of whole, real foods. 
17.  Sleep 7 to 9 hours every night. 
18.  Pull ups are my favorite exercise.  Get a home pull up bar to practice. 
19.  Get out and spend a few minutes in nature.  Appreciate the world around you while taking in fresh air and natural beauty. 
20.  We all need to pull more in our workouts.  Add more pulling movements horizontally and vertically. 
21. Surround yourself with health minded people. 
22. Keep your room dark for deep sound sleep.  A sleep mask is great for that! 
23. Use chemical free cosmetics.  Your skin is the largest organ of your body and all chemicals will absorb into your blood stream. 
24. Unilateral movements will help improve symmetrical strength. 
25. Become more playful.  We take life too seriously, becoming stress and overwhelmed.  How can you play, smile and laugh more often?
26.  Choose foods that have one ingredient.  Keep your diet simple and clean. 
27.  Keep your joints mobile as you age.  Do exercises that take joints through a full range of motion. 
28. Go to sleep no later than 10:30pm.  This allows your body and brain to repair through the night. 
29. Take care of your health and needs before others.  This allows you to be the best spouse, parent, coworker, and person on the planet. 
30.  Always start your daily with a high fat, high protein meal.  This will encourage less sugar cravings later in the day. 
31. Approach the day with positive thinking!  Stinkin’ thinkin’ only leads to more stress and frustration. 
32. You are never “too old” to do something.  Stay young at heart and keep fitness a priority as the years go by. 
33. Dream big and go for it. 
34.  Lift weights 2 to 4 times every week.  Strong is the new sexy. 
35.  Love.  Love yourself unconditionally.  Love your life and live it to the fullest.  Love others compassionately. 

Amber B.
Cureality Exercise and Fitness Coach

To Change, You Need to Get Uncomfortable

Sitting on the couch is comfortable.  Going through the drive thru to pick up dinner is comfortable.  But when you notice that you’re out-of-shape, tired, sick and your clothes no longer fit, you realize that what makes you comfortable is not in align with what would make you happy.   

You want to see something different when you look in the mirror.  You want to fit into a certain size of jeans or just experience your day with more energy and excitement.  The current condition of your life causes you pain, be it physical, mental or emotional.  To escape the pain you are feeling, you know that you need to make changes to your habits that keep you stuck in your current state.  But why is it so hard to make the changes you know that will help you achieve what you want?  

I want to lose weight but….

I want a six pack but…

I want more energy but….

The statement that follows the “but” is often a situation or habit you are comfortable with.  You want to lose weight but don’t have time to cook healthy meals.  So it’s much more comfortable to go through the drive thru instead of trying some new recipes.   New habits often require a learning curve and a bit of extra time in the beginning.  It also takes courage and energy to establish new routines or seek out help.  

Setting out to achieve your goals requires change.  Making changes to establish new habits that support your goals and dreams can be uncomfortable.  Life, as you know it, will be different.  Knowing that fact can be scary, but so can staying in your current condition.  So I’m asking you to take a risk and get uncomfortable so that you can achieve your goals.  

Realize that it takes 21 days to develop a new habit.  I believe it takes triple that amount of time to really make a new habit stick for the long haul.  So for 21 days, you’ll experience some discomfort while you make changes to your old routine and habits.  Depending on what you are changing, discomfort could mean feeling tired, moody, or even withdrawal symptoms.  However, the longer you stick to your new habits the less uncomfortable you start to feel.  The first week is always the worst, but then it gets easier.

Making it through the uncomfortable times requires staying focused on your goals and not caving to your immediate feelings or desires.  I encourage clients to focus on why their goals important to them.  This reason or burning desire to change will help when old habits, cravings, or situations call you back to your old ways.
Use a tracking and a reward system to stay on track.  Grab a calendar, journal or index card to check off or note your daily successes.  Shoot for consistency and not perfection when trying to make changes.  I encourage my clients to use the 90/10 principle of change and apply that to their goal tracking system.  New clothes, a massage, or a day me-retreat are just a few examples of rewards you can use to sticking to your tracking system.  Pick something that really gets you excited.  

Getting support system in place can help you feel more comfortable with being uncomfortable.  Hiring a coach, joining an online support group, or recruiting family and friends can be very helpful when making big changes.  With a support system in place you are not alone in your discomfort.  You’re network is there for you to reach out for help, knowledge, accountability or camaraderie when you feel frustrated and isolated.  

I’ve helped hundreds of people change their bodies, health and lives of the eleven years I’ve worked as a trainer and coach.  I know it’s hard, but I also know that if they can do it, so can you.  You just need to step outside of your comfort zone and take a risk. Don’t let fear create uncomfortable feelings that keep you stuck in your old ways.  Take that first step and enjoy the journey of reaching your goals and dreams.  

Amber Budahn, B.S., CSCS, ACE PT, USATF 1, CHEK HLC 1, REIKI 1
Cureality Exercise Specialist

The 3 Best Grain Free Food Swaps to Boost Fat Burning

You can join others enjoying substantial improvements in their health, energy and pant size by making a few key, delicious substitutions to your eating habits.  This is possible with the Cureality nutrition approach, which rejects the idea that grains should form the cornerstone of the human diet.  

Grain products, which are seeds of grasses, are incompatible with human digestion.  Contrary to what we have been told for years, eating healthy whole grain is not the answer to whittle away our waists.  Consumption of all grain-based carbohydrates results in increased production of the fat storage hormone insulin.  Increased insulin levels create the perfect recipe for weight gain. By swapping out high carbohydrate grain foods that cause spikes in insulin with much lower carbohydrate foods, insulin release is subdued and allows the body to release fat.

1. Swap wheat-based flour with almond flour/meal

  • One of the most dubious grain offenders is modern wheat. Replace wheat flour with naturally wheat-free, lower carbohydrate almond flour.  
  • Almond flour contains a mere 12 net carbs per cup (carbohydrate minus the fiber) with 50% more filling protein than all-purpose flour.
  • Almond flour and almond meal also offer vitamin E, an important antioxidant to support immune function.

2. Swap potatoes and rice for cauliflower

  • Replace high carb potatoes and pasta with vitamin C packed cauliflower, which has an inconsequential 3 carbs per cup.  
  • Try this food swap: blend raw cauliflower in food processor to make “rice”. (A hand held grater can also be used).  Sautee the “riced” cauliflower in olive or coconut oil for 5 minutes with seasoning to taste.
  • Another food swap: enjoy mashed cauliflower in place of potatoes.  Cook cauliflower. Place in food processor with ½ a stick organic, grass-fed butter, ½ a package full-fat cream cheese and blend until smooth. Add optional minced garlic, chives or other herbs such as rosemary.
3. Swap pasta for shirataki noodles and zucchini

  • Swap out carb-rich white pasta containing 43 carbs per cup with Shirataki noodles that contain a few carbs per package. Shirataki noodles are made from konjac or yam root and are found in refrigerated section of supermarkets.
  • Another swap: zucchini contains about 4 carbs per cup. Make your own grain free, low-carb noodles from zucchini using a julienne peeler, mandolin or one of the various noodle tools on the market.  

Lisa Grudzielanek, MS,RDN,CD,CDE
Cureality Nutrition Specialist

Not so fast. Don’t make this mistake when going gluten free!

Beginning last month, the Food and Drug Administration began implementing its definition of “gluten-free” on packaged food labels.  The FDA determined that packaged food labeled gluten free (or similar claims such as "free of gluten") cannot contain more than 20 parts per million of gluten.

It has been years in the making for the FDA to define what “gluten free” means and hold food manufactures accountable, with respect to food labeling.  However, the story does not end there.

Yes, finding gluten-free food, that is now properly labeled, has become easier. So much so the market for gluten-free foods tops $6 billion last year.   However, finding truly healthy, commercially prepared, grain-free foods is still challenging.

A very common mistake made when jumping into the gluten-free lifestyle is piling everything labeled gluten-free in the shopping cart.  We don’t want to replace a problem: wheat, with another problem: gluten free products.

Typically gluten free products are made with rice flour (and brown rice flour), tapioca starch, cornstarch, and potato flour.  Of the few foods that raise blood sugar higher than wheat, these dried, powdered starches top the list.

 They provide a large surface area for digestion, thereby leading to sky-high blood sugar and all the consequences such as diabetes, hypertension, cataracts, arthritis, and heart disease. These products should be consumed very rarely consumed, if at all.  As Dr. Davis has stated, “100% gluten-free usually means 100% awful!”

There is an ugly side to the gluten-free boom taking place.  The Cureality approach to wellness recommends selecting gluten-free products wisely.  Do not making this misguided mistake and instead aim for elimination of ALL grains, as all seeds of grasses are related to wheat and therefore overlap in many effects.

Lisa Grudzielanek MS, RDN, CD, CDE
Cureality Health & Nutrition Coach

3 Foods to Add to Your Next Grocery List

Looking for some new foods to add to your diet? Look no further. Reach for these three mealtime superstars to encourage a leaner, healthier body.

Microgreens

Microgreens are simply the shoots of salad greens and herbs that are harvested just after the first leaves have developed, or in about 2 weeks.  Microgreen are not sprouts. Sprouts are germinated, in other words, sprouted seeds produced entirely in water. Microgreens are grown in soil, thereby absorbing the nutrients from the soil.

The nutritional profile of each microgreen depends greatly on the type of microgreen you are eating. Researchers found red cabbage microgreens had 40 times more vitamin E and six times more vitamin C than mature red cabbage. Cilantro microgreens had three times more beta-carotene than mature cilantro.

A few popular varieties of microgreens are arugula, kale, radish, pea, and watercress. Flavor can vary from mild to a more intense or spicy mix depending on the microgreens.  They can be added to salads, soup, omelets, stir fry and in place of lettuce.  

Cacao Powder

Cocoa and cacao are close enough in flavor not to make any difference. However, raw cacao powder has 3.6 times the antioxidant activity of roasted cocoa powder.  In short, raw cacao powder is definitely the healthiest, most beneficial of the powders, followed by 100% unsweetened cocoa.

Cacao has more antioxidant flavonoids than blueberries, red wine and black and green teas.  Cacao is one of the highest sources of magnesium, a great source of iron and vitamin C, as well as a good source of fiber for healthy bowel function.
Add cacao powder to milk for chocolate milk or real hot chocolate.  Consider adding to coffee for a little mocha magic or sprinkle on berries and yogurt.




Shallots


Shallots have a better nutrition profile than onions. On a weight per weight basis, they have more anti-oxidants, minerals, and vitamins than onions. Shallots have a milder, less pungent taste than onions, so people who do not care for onions may enjoy shallots.

Like onions, sulfur compounds in shallot are necessary for liver detoxification pathways.  The sulfur compound, allicin has been shown to be beneficial in reducing cholesterol.  Allicin is also noted to have anti-bacterial, anti-viral, and anti-fungal activities.

Diced then up and add to salads, on top of a bun less hamburger, soups, stews, or sauces.  Toss in an omelet or sauté to enhance a piece of chicken or steak, really the possibilities are endless.  

Lisa Grudzielanek,MS,RDN,CD,CDE
Cureality Nutrition & Health Coach

3 Band Exercises for Great Glutes

Bands and buns are a great combination.  (When I talk about glutes or a butt, I use the word buns)  When it comes to sculpting better buns, grab a band.   Bands are great for home workouts, at gym or when you travel.  Check out these 3 amazing exercises that will have your buns burning. 

Band Step Out

Grab a band and place it under the arch of each foot.  Then cross the band and rest your hands in your hip sockets.  The exercise starts with your feet hip width apart and weight in the heels.  Slightly bend the knees and step your right foot out to the side.  Step back in so that your foot is back in the starting position.  With each step, make sure your toes point straight ahead.  The tighter you pull the band, the more resistance you will have.    You will feel this exercise on the outside of your hips. 

Start with one set of 15 repetitions with each foot.  Work on increasing to 25 repetitions on each side and doing two to three sets.



Band Kick Back

This exercise is performed in the quadruped position with your knees under hips and hands under your shoulders.    Take the loop end of the band and put it around your right foot and place the two handles or ends of the band under your hands.  Without moving your body, kick your right leg straight back.  Return to the starting quadruped position.  Adjust the tension of the band to increase or decrease the difficulty of this exercise. 

Start with one set of 10 repetitions with each foot.  Work on increasing to 20 repetitions on each side and doing two to three sets. 



Band Resisted Hip Bridge

Start lying on your back with feet hip distance apart and knees bent at about a 45-degree angle.  Adjust your hips to a neutral position to alleviate any arching in your lower back.  Place the band across your hipbones.  Hold the band down with hands along the sides of your body.  Contract your abs and squeeze your glutes to lift your hips up off the ground.  Stop when your thighs, hips and stomach are in a straight line.  Lower you hips back down to the ground. 

Start with one set of 15 repetitions.  Work on increasing to 25 repetitions and doing two to three.  Another variation of this exercise is to hold the hip bridge position.  Start with a 30 second hold and work up to holding for 60 seconds.

Menopause unleashes lipoprotein(a)

Menopause unleashes lipoprotein(a)

Faye was clearly frustrated.

At age 52, she was having chest pains every day. A CT heart scan showed a score of zero. A CT coronary angiogram showed no plaque whatsoever.

"Everything went downhill when my menopause started. I gained weight, I started to have chest pains, my blood pressure went up, my cholesterol shot up."

She saw three physicians, none of whom shed much light on the situation. They ran through the predictable sequence of (horse, not human) estrogens, anti-depressants, suggestions for psychological counseling.

But we checked Faye for lipoprotein(a), which she proved to have at a high level of 182 nmol/l. This explained a lot.

A curious and predictable set of phenomenon occur to females with Lp(a) proceeding through the menopause. As estrogen recedes:

--Lp(a) levels rise dramatically.

--Blood pressure goes up, sometimes creating severe hypertension by mid- to late-50s.

--Chest pain can develop, presumably due to "endothelial dysfunction" or "microvascular angina", both representing abnormal coronary artery constriction facilitated by worsening expression of Lp(a).

All too often, these phenomena get dismissed as simply part of the menopausal package, when they are, in fact, important facets of this very important genetic pattern that confers high risk for heart disease.

If any of this rings familiar for you or a loved one, think Lp(a). Though Faye hadn't yet developed any measurable coronary plaque by her CT heart scan score, it was likely on its way, given the surge in Lp(a) expression as menopause unfolded--unless its recognized and appropriate preventive action taken.
Loading
What the Institute of Medicine SHOULD have said

What the Institute of Medicine SHOULD have said

The news is full of comments, along with many attention-grabbing headlines, about the announcement from the Institute of Medicine that the new Recommended Daily Allowance (RDA) for vitamin D should be 600 units per day for adults.

What surprised me was the certainty with which some of the more outspoken committee members expressed with their view that 1) the desirable serum 25-hydroxy vitamin D level was only 20 ng/ml, and 2) that most Americans already obtain a sufficient quantity of vitamin D.

Here's what I believe the Institute of Medicine SHOULD have said:

Multiple lines of evidence suggest that there is a plausible biological basis for vitamin D's effects on cancer, inflammatory responses, bone health, and metabolic responses including insulin responsiveness and blood glucose. However, the full extent and magnitude of these responses has not yet been fully characterized.

Given the substantial observations reported in several large epidemiologic studies that show an inverse correlation between 25-hydroxy vitamin D levels and mortality, there is without question an association between vitamin D and mortality from cancer, cardiovascular disease, and all cause mortality. However, it has not been established that there are cause-effect relationships, as this cannot be established by epidemiologic study.

While the adverse health effects of 25-hydroxy vitamin D levels of less than 30 ng/ml have been established, the evidence supporting achieving higher 25-hydroxy vitamin D levels remains insufficient, limited to epidemiologic observations on cancer incidence. However, should 25-hydroxy vitamin D levels of greater than 30 ng/ml be shown to be desirable for ideal health, then vitamin D deficiency has potential to be the most widespread deficiency of the modern age.

Given the potential for vitamin D's impact on multiple facets of health, as suggested by preliminary epidemiologic and basic science data, we suggest that future research efforts be focused on establishing 1) the ideal level of 25-hydroxy vitamin D levels to achieve cancer-preventing, bone health-preserving or reversing, and cardiovascular health preventive benefits, 2) the racial and genetic (vitamin D receptor, VDR) variants that may account for varying effects in different populations, 3) whether vitamin D restoration has potential to exert not just health-preserving effects, but also treatment effects, specifically as adjunct to conventional cancer and osteoporosis therapies, and 4) how such vitamin D restoration is best achieved.

Until the above crucial issues are clarified, we advise Americans that vitamin D is a necessary and important nutrient for multiple facets of health but, given current evidence, are unable to specify a level of vitamin D intake that is likely to be safe, effective, and fully beneficial for all Americans.


Instead of a careful, science-minded conclusion that meets the painfully conservative demands of crafting broad public policy, the committee instead chose to dogmatically pull the discussion back to the 1990s, ignoring the flood of compelling evidence that suggests that vitamin D is among the most important public health issues of the age.

Believe it or not, this new, though anemic, RDA represents progress: It's a (small) step farther down the road towards broader recognition and acceptance that higher intakes (or skin exposures) to achieve higher vitamin D levels are good for health.

My view: Vitamin D remains among the most substantial, life-changing health issues of our age. Having restored 25-hydroxy vitamin D levels in over 1000 people, I have no doubt whatsoever that vitamin D achieves substantial benefits in health with virtually no downside, provided 25-hydroxy vitamin D levels are monitored.

Comments (47) -

  • Peter

    12/1/2010 2:27:18 AM |

    The headlines could have sais IOM raises RDA of Vitamin D 50%.

  • Jenny

    12/1/2010 2:29:45 AM |

    There is as yet NO study where supplementation with Vitamin D was shwon to reverse or improve any of the conditions with which the deficiency is associated.

    We can't call for evidence based medicine and then dismiss that call when the evidence isn't there to support our pet theories.

    I have not found any studies suggesting that Vitamin D improves blood sugar control in people who had low levels, and though I get an avalanche of mail from the diabetes community I have not heard from anyone whose blood sugar improved after taking it.

    So my conclusion is that it is not the cure all that some people would like it to be. With the unhappy history of Vitamin A, C, and E supplementation (which turn out to be ineffective or in the case of the antioxidants correlate with higher mortality) the people making these kinds of recommendations are right to be cautious.

    And given the very bad outcome with the megadose injections, and the poor quality of the expensive supplements, it's probably good they didn't endorse it more enthusiastically. More study is needed, particularly in regard to setting doses so people don't end up with milk alkali syndrome.

  • Anonymous

    12/1/2010 5:01:18 AM |

    I'm somewhat convinced I've experienced many health benefits from D supplementation.  I'm also somewhat convinced it's played a significant role in my body's new habit of making kidney stones.

  • PY

    12/1/2010 11:10:26 AM |

    Isn't the burden of proof on vitamin D proponents to show supplementation has a unambiguously positive effect, particularly when there is concern that there may be negative effects?  Your response here unfortunately doesn't give us much to stand on as vitamin D users, in terms of any rigorous data-based conclusions (as opposed to observational conclusions).  That is somewhat concerning.

  • PY

    12/1/2010 11:14:37 AM |

    Here is one article on the ISM panel's conclusions.  I am re-posting it here, as it my previous comment with the link was deleted from the previous post on this blog:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/30/health/30vitamin.html?src=me&ref=homepage

    From the article:

    "But Andrew Shao, an executive vice president at the Council for Responsible Nutrition, a trade group, said the panel was being overly cautious, especially in its recommendations about vitamin D.  He said there was no convincing evidence that people were being harmed by taking supplements, and he said higher levels of vitamin D, in particular, could be beneficial.

    Such claims “are not supported by the available evidence,” the committee wrote. They were based on studies that observed populations and concluded that people with lower levels of the vitamin had more of various diseases. Such studies have been misleading and most scientists agree that they cannot determine cause and effect.

    It is not clear how or why the claims for high vitamin D levels started, medical experts say. First there were two studies, which turned out to be incorrect, that said people needed 30 nanograms of vitamin D per milliliter of blood, the upper end of what the committee says is a normal range. They were followed by articles and claims and books saying much higher levels — 40 to 50 nanograms or even higher — were needed.

    After reviewing the data, the committee concluded that the evidence for the benefits of high levels of vitamin D was “inconsistent and/or conflicting and did not demonstrate causality.”

    Evidence also suggests that high levels of vitamin D can increase the risks for fractures and the overall death rate and can raise the risk for other diseases. While those studies are not conclusive, any risk looms large when there is no demonstrable benefit. Those hints of risk are “challenging the concept that ‘more is better,’ ” the committee wrote.

    That is what surprised Dr. Black. “We thought that probably higher is better,” he said.

    He has changed his mind, and expects others will too: “I think this report will make people more cautious.”

  • Jim

    12/1/2010 11:46:18 AM |

    Just wanted to say that I really appreciate what Dr. Davis brings to this site.  

    And I also appreciate the community here that is not afraid to push back from time to time with thoughtful opposing comments.  

    After what we have seen in the last 30 years, at this point, it should take a lot of convincing any time vitamin x or food y is offered up as the next great health wonder.

  • qualia

    12/1/2010 2:33:20 PM |

    @jenny i really can't take your comments seriously. you doesn't seem to know what you're talking about at all.

    "poor quality of the expensive supplements"

    SERIOUSLY?? vitamin D3 is one of the cheapest and simplest supplement you can get on the market. a years supply of 5000IU even from high-quality, reputable brands rarely costs more than 15-20$ on-line. wtf are you talking about?

  • Anonymous

    12/1/2010 2:52:38 PM |

    Jenny's right, when I take anything above 1500 IU/day (conservative according to more and more proponents of D3 supplementation) I get sign of hypercalcaemia immediately.

    And yes, I have tried adding K2, makes no difference.

    I'm from Northern European heritage and suspect that we need very little D.

  • Nigel Kinbrum

    12/1/2010 3:15:48 PM |

    Anonymous said...
    "Jenny's right, when I take anything above 1500 IU/day (conservative according to more and more proponents of D3 supplementation) I get sign of hypercalcaemia immediately.

    And yes, I have tried adding K2, makes no difference.

    I'm from Northern European heritage and suspect that we need very little D."


    I'm descended from Poles & Lithuanians and have normal serum Calcium (by blood test) on 5,000iu/day D3. Have you been tested for Sarcoidosis, Primary Hyperparathyroidism, Milk-alkali Syndrome or any other medical condition that can result in hypercalcaemia?

    K2 doesn't prevent hypercalcaemia. It only reduces inappropriate calcification that can occur even with normocalcaemia.

  • Anand Srivastava

    12/1/2010 3:40:54 PM |

    When taking supplements that should not cause problems normally, and you experience problems there is normally an underlying problem.

    My brother was detected Hashimoto's when supplementing iodine.

    My wife has a single kidney, and very high doses of vitamin D causes her problem. But 4000IU is not a problem.

    If you are getting a problem at 1500IU, you should get yourself tested for hyperparathyroidism. It is a pretty common result of Vitamin D supplementation. There may be other reasons why Vitmain D3 may cause problems, particularly in renal system.

    It is good to take these vitamin once in a higher dose to determine if you have any problem related to their dosage.

  • Anne

    12/1/2010 7:11:10 PM |

    Jenny - Here's a study: 'Vitamin D and diabetes Improvement of glycemic control with vitamin D3 repletion':

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2426990/

  • Anonymous

    12/1/2010 11:00:35 PM |

    Anyone here ever read "The Real Truth About Vitamins and Antioxidants" by Judith DeCava ?

    Most "vitamins" are actually very high doses of only parts or fractions of naturally occuring vitamins. Therefore they act like drugs, not like nutrition. They CANNOT help organs heal.
    Dr. Gus

  • Anonymous

    12/1/2010 11:47:41 PM |

    I weigh 114 lbs and take 2400 IU daily (softgels). I recently tested at 56 after 2 years of supplementation. Although, last summer I took 5000 IU daily. I am concerned about excess D, but I don't have a doctor. I won't be stabbing my fingers again since my finger still hasn't recovered from a home test. It still hurts after 6 weeks. I believe vitamin D has helped me, and I don't really want to cut back on the dose. However, I'm reducing the dose to an average of 2000 IU daily. I will try to test with Life Extension next time if I can find a lab around here - definitely vein jab only! I wish I had a good doctor.

  • Anonymous

    12/2/2010 12:42:37 AM |

    Well I guess most of the time we Canadians are in lock-stock with our neighbors on the continent

    http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fn-an/nutrition/vitamin/vita-d-eng.php

    that is a big improvement though.  The 4000IU max is half what I take but then again, this is a recommendation for a healthy individual not someone with a family history of heart disease like me.

    K2 max is about a quarter of my daily:-
    http://webprod.hc-sc.gc.ca/nhpid-bdipsn/singredReq.do?id=546&lang=eng

    But apparently for fish oil I am on target:-
    http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/dhp-mps/prodnatur/applications/licen-prod/monograph/mono_fish_oil_huile_poisson-eng.php

    I tell people about this site every chance I get

  • Peter

    12/2/2010 1:09:20 AM |

    There is one study referred to in The Perfect Health Diet (which parallels the advice in this blog very closely) that people who had blood levels of Vitamin D over 80 had triple the heart disease.  This from southern India.

  • Anonymous

    12/2/2010 1:51:33 AM |

    and what do you expect from a self styled government organization?
    At least people with any sort of common sense and knowledge will know to disregard their "advice". And there is really no difference between 20 or 30 or 50 to 60. The gene transcription only starts after 100, I know I am supplementing vitamin D up to a million units per day to deal with various issues and I must say it works. I feel that vitamin D in such doses has a real effect on athletic abilities, I am sprinting like a teenager again and many other health improvements. Bottom line Dr. Davis, don't lose your time and nerves with the noise from governments and various "experts" , that's just barking up a wrong tree. They have an agenda to rule over us and it's only a matter of whether we allow them or not.

  • Dr. William Davis

    12/2/2010 2:06:33 AM |

    I put as much stock in the Institute of Medicine's advice on vitamin D, or any other vitamin for that matter, as I do the advice of the USDA on nutrition. Both have declared themselves irrelevant by their almost ridiculous detachment from reality.

    The data are overwhelming: Vitamin D is intimately associated with multiple facets of health.

    Another issue: The committee appears to be applying a drug-like standard to vitamin D: They require placebo vs. treatment clinical trials, a standard that other vitamins have not been held up to.

  • Anonymous

    12/2/2010 2:07:28 AM |

    Goodness!  All of this focus on "science."  There really should be focus on just getting enough of this nutrient on a regular basis without interference from sunshine phobia and the lack of good nutrition from fats.

  • Dr. William Davis

    12/2/2010 2:09:40 AM |

    Sorry, Jenny, but I believe that you are flat wrong.

    While the studies tend to be small, there are indeed studies that have shown reversal of various conditions, including reversal of blood markers for bone resorption, insulin resistance, c-reactive protein, hyperparathyroidism, hypercalcemia, etc.

    Just because vitamin D has not enjoyed the deep-pocketed budget of a drug company's backing and therefore does not yet have a vitamin D vs placebo trial does not mean that humans do not need it or don't need more of it.

    I am personally appalled at the committee's closed-mindedness at what I believe is an incredibly important "supplement." Frankly, I don't care what the IOM says; I continue to do what I believe is right and what has worked for me and my patients time and time again.

  • Garry

    12/2/2010 2:24:11 AM |

    Dr. Davis,
    Do you routinely monitor blood calcium levels in your vitamin D-supplemented patients?  Thanks.

  • Daniel A. Clinton, RN, BSN

    12/2/2010 6:25:05 AM |

    This new recommendation accomplishes absolutely nothing. Those who are still ignorant as to the absurd irrelevance of consensus opinions by government health offices or medical professional organizations will continue to be Vitamin D deficient. And those of us who are really good at interpreting data and have thoroughly researched Vitamin D will trust our read of the data over all the propaganda.  All this does is show that we are at least 15 years ahead of most everyone else, and that's actually really sad, and something I refuse to accept because America deserves better.

  • Patricia D.

    12/2/2010 8:54:15 AM |

    Regarding the above mentioned statement by Dr. Cannell of the Vitamin D Council: Today, the FNB has failed millions... - Toward the end, Dr. Cannell discusses his intention to have the suppressed reports - by Vitamin D experts associated with the decision by the FNB - made public.  Which would be great.

  • Anonymous

    12/2/2010 9:49:15 AM |

    Hey, if they go on "progressing" that way the RDA will be quite allright in...em... 250 years...
    Let's celebrate!

  • Drs. Cynthia and David

    12/2/2010 10:34:11 AM |

    Many of the studies that have been done have used very small doses of vit D, so the failure to show unequivocal results is not surprising.  The associational studies don't prove causation of course but certainly provide hypotheses for testing.  So the conservative approach (CYA) is to recommend low doses still.  A search of clinicaltrials.gov for vit D trials shows a ton of trials being initiated.  We will have to wait a few years for the results to be reported and interpreted.  Meanwhile, I supplement with 5000 units per day but don't take calcium as that doesn't seem to be necessary with adequate D levels, and my calcium level is right where it should be.  

    Cynthia

  • Adam

    12/2/2010 1:01:32 PM |

    I'm tempted to write a faux press release from the IOM saying that there is little conclusive evidence that Vitamin C is related to scurvy and that we should be cautious in making radical arguments for fruit in the navy. ;)

  • Steve Cooksey

    12/2/2010 1:36:37 PM |

    I agree with Dr. Davis on D3.

    Primarily due to my own experience. I supplement with Vit D3 (4-6k) and Omega 3 Daily.

    I am a type 2 diabetic who has normal blood sugar AND I take -0- drugs and -0- insulin.

  • Peter

    12/2/2010 1:50:27 PM |

    One study that would be very cheap and fast would be to test Dr.Davis's observation that vitamin D from tablets doesn't reliably raise blood levels like gelcaps do.

  • Anonymous

    12/2/2010 7:26:26 PM |

    The Vitamin D issue is becoming the Global Warming controversy of the medical world. I haven't seen such sharp divisions in the medical community over the efficacy of any other drug/supplement as this one. The usual way this goes is that for any non-pharmaceutical/non-prescription item, there always strong push back from the governing medical bodies, despite empirical data suggesting benefit.

  • DK

    12/3/2010 2:32:46 AM |

    I have no doubt whatsoever that vitamin D achieves substantial benefits in health with virtually no downside, provided 25-hydroxy vitamin D levels are monitored.

    Don't you think such statements are a tad cavalier? Literature certainly does not give one such level of confidence. There are several indicators that some cancers increase with increasing Vit. D. Plus, there are bound to be ethnic and gender differences in response to vit. D. And you have no doubt that treating everyone the same to achieve the same and largely random number is a good thing? Wow, just wow.

  • Anonymous

    12/3/2010 8:27:18 PM |

    This seems scary, Vitamin D associated with increased risk of pancreatic cancer:

    http://fanaticcook.blogspot.com/2010/11/vitamin-d-linked-to-pancreatic-cancer.html

  • Travis Culp

    12/3/2010 9:00:55 PM |

    Just wait until there is a Lovaza-like pharmaceutical D3 that costs 1000 dollars a month and suddenly the RDA will rise to where it should be.

  • Anonymous

    12/3/2010 11:01:48 PM |

    Jenny,

      I have seen HbA1c improve in couple of cases with Vitamin D supplementation. Here's a reference to a similar observation http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/science/Lack-of-vitamin-D-poses-diabetes-risk/articleshow/6922336.cms

    -- DK

  • Anonymous

    12/7/2010 4:58:12 PM |

    Make sure to avoid vitamin A supplements (including cod liver oil), unless you're truly deficient. Excess vitamin A blocks vitamin D benefits. I read this on the vitamin D council site.

  • Anonymous

    12/8/2010 12:07:23 AM |

    Relevant articles:

    "Anticancer Vitamins du Jour—The ABCED's So Far"

    http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/172/1/1.full

    "Vitamin D in Cancer Patients: Above All, Do No Harm"
    http://jco.ascopubs.org/content/27/13/2117.full?ijkey=e5433c6693ba2181f407767e5368af0d4a110ea5&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha

  • O Primitivo

    12/8/2010 12:18:29 AM |

    There are only 8 trials on vitamin D and Diabetes, and some of them are null - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=vitamin%20d[title]%20AND%20diabetes[title]%20AND%20%28Clinical%20Trial[ptyp]%20OR%20Randomized%20Controlled%20Trial[ptyp]%29

  • Nigel Kinbrum

    12/8/2010 2:04:04 PM |

    RE Null Trials:-
    In Avenell et al, only 800iu/day was used.
    In de Boer et al, only 400iu/day was used.
    In Orwoll et al, calcitriol 1ug/day for only 4 days was used.

  • O Primitivo

    12/8/2010 5:45:35 PM |

    Nigel, thanks for the correction. I truly believe vitamin D supplementaion and more exposure is beneficial. The full IOM ob-line report is available here - http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13050

  • O Primitivo

    12/8/2010 5:59:12 PM |

    The "desirable" levels this institute assumed are not based on evolutionary evidence, they only considered the minimum level to avoid rickets. Here is a free 29-page pdf summary of the report: http://www.nap.edu/nap-cgi/report.cgi?record_id=13050&type=pdfxsum

  • Dana Seilhan

    12/11/2010 9:07:51 AM |

    I don't know what Jenny means by studies done on vitamin A.  They did a study on beta carotene and smokers.  I have my own pet hypothesis about that:  there's some thinking that cancers eat so much glucose not only because it's the only fuel many of the cancer types can use, but because it protects them from oxidation.  It makes me wonder if beta carotene encouraged lung cancer in that smokers study because the cancer cells were vulnerable to oxidative damage and the BC protected them!

    Be that as it may, beta carotene is not vitamin A, any more than clay is a brick.

    I cured a three-year run of excessive menstruation by supplementing retinol from fish liver oil.  Anecdotal evidence, I know, but the more I dig around on Science Daily and similar websites, the more I find connections between vitamin A and reproductive health, including sound development of the embryo and fetus.  I don't know where researchers get the notion that vitamin A causes birth defects;  it may actually do the exact opposite.

    I have heard criticisms that where researchers have made claims about the harmfulness of vitamin A, they are doing so based on data about synthetic vitamin A.  Fish liver oil--and hey, land-animal liver if you like to eat it--shouldn't be a problem then.

    And anyone who intakes the fat-soluble vitamins all out of balance is going to have a problem.  I'd recommend reading the Weston A. Price Foundation's information on the subject.  For instance, the ratio of vitamin A to vitamin D intake in the diet should be at least 10 to 1 or better (9 to 1, 8 to 1, etc.).

    There is still so much we don't know about these vitamins.  But in healthy populations with low dental caries and birth defect rates and with ideal or near-ideal development of facial bone structure, the intake of fat-solubles was several times the American intake in the early 1900s, when it was still considerably higher than it is in the U.S. today!  They had lab tests back then for all the fat-solubles except K, which was discovered later.  So this was documented.

    More recent studies have shown that calcium is not as well absorbed in a diet that is too high in fiber relative to fat intake.  WAPF claims that fat-soluble vitamins are necessary for the assimilation of minerals;  we've seen that with vitamin D and calcium and (if I'm not mistaken) vitamin A and iron.  There are definite connections between FS vitamins and health, even if no one's handed stone tablets down from heaven to show us either way.  There is evidence.  You just have to want to see it.

  • Kathy Kaufman's blog

    12/11/2010 12:27:17 PM |

    Dr. Davis, I had an interesting anecdotal experience from taking vitamin D.  I have suffered from canker sores since I was a young child. I'm in my sixties now and they seem to be getting worse and more frequent with multiple outbreaks to the point sometimes it was hard to speak.  Recently my MD tested my vitamin D levels and said they were too high (100) and I should cut back. I cut back and 2 days later I got 3 canker sores.  I hadn't even realized I didn't have one in the 8 months I'd been taking vitamin D.  I know the experts need to see all the clinical studies. The rest of us just want to be healthy! ( Prevention Magazine said broccoli could protect against cancer in the 1960s. Its taken the experts 50 years to catch up. )

  • Anonymous

    12/15/2010 11:13:52 AM |

    In light of the fact that the body can synthesis 10,000 IU of D3 in a short time exposed to UVB (AKA, Sunlight)...With no adverse effects, I dont understand how supplementing with say 5000IU daily, is a bad thing.

    These paltry, overly conservative recommendations are coming from  organization(s) who have got a whole lot of things wrong in the past regarding diet etc. And for the most part still are.

    Its funny that we live in a society that has a complete meltdown about supplementation issues, but doesn't generate the same hysteria or debate about the amount of diet soda, cheetos, processed foods in general, that are consumed. Funny time we are living in.

  • Garry

    12/17/2010 11:25:48 PM |

    Along the lines of Dana's comment, here's an interesting blog article by Chris Masterjohn on the topic of D, A and K.
    http://foundation.westonaprice.org/blogs/is-vitamin-d-safe-still-depends-on-vitamins-a-and-k-testimonials-and-a-human-study.html

  • George

    2/2/2011 10:42:55 PM |

    Dr Davis, I have had good lipid results, overall health with a lowercarb, nonprocessed food, no wheat diet and vitamin D suppplementation over the last 3 years. Unfortunately, have also discovered the agony of calcium oxalate kidney stones (3 episodes/3 years). Have seen some studies implicating higher protein diets and vitamin d supplementation. Have you run into kidney stones with any of your patients on vitamin d supplemention?

  • Dave

    5/12/2011 7:14:31 PM |

    To whom it may concern.  I began supplementing with Vitamin D3 a few years ago.  Right at first, I was having a considerable amount of restless legs and restless sleep.  There were other side effects that included increased muscular spasms.  Upon further research, I started supplementing with extra Magnesium. ( I was already taking MagOx which obviously was not getting absorbed).  The magnesium was a highly absorbable magnesium malate. (Magnesium glycinate is good too).  Anyway, after a few weeks the side effects disappeared and I have not had those problems since.  Vitamin D3 increases calcium absorption.  We must have an increase of magnesium to balance calcium.  Just a little FYI for those of you having kidney stones or other side effects from your vitamin D3 supplementation.

Loading