In addition to losing weight, I can not emphasize enough the education that I have gained over these past weeks via Dr. Nagy’s newsletters, his personal consultation, and from reading several of the books he has recommended I read.  I now feel that I have gained the nutritional knowledge to successfully keep the weight off.  I have not been on a diet, rather a new lifestyle, that I am very comfortable with, and that I can maintain for life.  My friends and family now think of me as a health “nut”, but that is ok, as they admire the changes in me that they are witnessing, and when we talk about nutrition, I now have the credibility that they listen.

Dr. Nagy knows the pitfalls of everyday life, the misinformation about “healthy nutrition” that we are fed in the news every day, and debunks these myths in a very logical and easily understood way.  If you wish to live your life more fully, make beneficial changes and are not really sure how, I highly recommend that you consult with Dr. Nagy.  Wellness, anti-aging, and total health are truly his passion.  He is unlike any medical professional I have ever known.  Thank you Dr. Nagy – have a green smoothie on me!

I would like to invite you spend a little time to watch and learn what steps you can take now to ensure that there will be more life in your years rather then just more years in your life. Knowing that we control our destiny and carrying that mentality serves one well over the long term. It is the choices we make today that will determine our path in the future. The sooner we learn this, the sooner we will take the necessary steps to do the right things for ourselves.

Rather then writing up the whole talk I would like to suggest some major points to consider:

- Control your systemic Inflammation and Insulin levels and you will control your long term health
- Eat Real, Whole Food!  Avoid processed, artificial, chemical laden garbage that is so prevalent in our current society. If your grandmother wouldn’t recognize it as food, don’t eat it
- Supplement appropriately to make up for what is missing in your diet. Targeted nutritional supplementation is necessary if you are eating the Standard American Diet (SAD)
- Recognize the value of the Mind-Body connection. The biggest drug in the body is the brain – use it well
- Stress – face it and develop a mechanism by which to deal with it. We’re all under stress, how you handle it will determine how well you age
- Stand in your own truth and think for yourself. Do the research and realize that only you are looking out for you. Until we take responsibility for our health, we will continue down the current path we are on

Those are just some highlights and they are further expounded upon in the talk. I encourage you to spend the time to listen and learn. Take care of yourself and an abundant life will follow. Do the right thing and you will reap the rewards over the long term.

Thanks and enjoy the show,

Chris

“We’re lonely, but we’re afraid of intimacy. And so from social networks to sociable robots, we’re designing technologies that will give us the illusion of companionship without the demands of friendship.”

As we embrace the thrill and intelligence of technology we, in many ways, lose the intimacy of relationships. It is the loss of human interaction that may even further lead us into a sense of loneliness. Being ever more connected, we are also ever more alone.

The points Dr. Turkle makes are quite relevant to our modern society. We long for connectivity but cherish control. As a side effect of trying to “control the conversation” we lose the face to face interaction often necessary to truly connect. Are we dumbing down our communication by thinking only in quick thoughts that can be expressed in 140 characters or less (no, I don’t have a twitter account…yet)?

This post has already exceeded the collective attention span so I will leave you with an excellent talk by Dr. Turkle. The information she provides is thought provoking and I hope it will make you re-evaluate the way you communicate and maintain your relationships. Technology is not bad, we just have to evaluate how it can help, how it can hurt and what price we’re paying for the convenience. This talk, sadly caused me to realize that my primary time of solitude pretty much only occurs when I am mowing the lawn. Other than that, I’m connected, on the move and entrenched in the current system. A wake up call to change.

Take time to smell the roses and share yourself with your loved ones,

Chris

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/371249/january-17-2011/sherry-turkle

I do not relay this information solely because I am a strong proponent of the Paleo diet. I relay this because a newspaper headline and a media blitz do not even come close to providing a balanced analysis of what this study shows. The study was what is called an observational study. This basically demonstrates correlations but does not definitively demonstrate causation. In other words, there is an association but not a definitive link between what is stated as being associated. A similar example would be saying a large shoe size is associated with a greater ability to read (an adults shoe size is much bigger than an infants and most adults are better at reading than babies, thus the results).

An observational study helps a scientist develop a hypothesis which then requires further testing to determine cause and effect. The rational way to proceed on the information gleaned in this study would be to now develop a study where all variables are controlled so that a cause and effect can be actually and fully determined. The fact that the group with the higher mortality drank more, smoked more, had a higher BMI, consumed more calories daily and were less active, all play a role in the mortality rate. Unless these variables are excluded, how does one determine which variable carried the most weight? All of these variables are associated with decreased longevity. To have all of these variables noted in the group with the highest mortality seriously detracts from the supposed finding in this study that red meat is the most important factor.

An additional problem with this study is the way the information on diet was gathered. Questionnaires were filled out every four years reflecting the participants diet. Practically speaking, who remembers what they had to eat last Tuesday, let alone what they have eaten over the past four years? People tend to fill out food surveys with not necessarily what they have been eating, but with what they know they should be eating. Who hasn’t fudged the facts on their diet when considering that they may be judged by someone overseeing them? While we would like to think everyone in this study was 100% honest, I wouldn’t bet the bank on the accuracy of the self reported results.

These types of studies frequently are published and this one, though the most recent, is no different then previous ones. There will be more, but what we really need is a randomized, prospective trial that will compare and limit the variables so that we can learn the truth. Until then, take studies like this with a grain of salt and trust your own instincts when evaluating this information. If it doesn’t sound right, dig a little deeper and you will find it probably is not. Personally, I think a diet consisting of grassfed beef (not factory raised on corn and soy – Eat animals that have eaten well themselves), whole food vegetables and fruit, with extremely limited to no grains and sugars is the ideal diet. This diet of course would include an adequate amount of good, healthy fat too(a whole different newsletter). Until a proper study is conducted comparing this type of diet to the other available diets out there, we will continue to be on our own and have to make our own decisions. Don’t be afraid and do your best to eat in a congruent fashion with your genetic ancestry, your life depends on it.

Fire up the grill,

Chris

http://www.marksdailyapple.com/will-eating-red-meat-kill-you/#axzz1pODP0PWQ

http://www.zoeharcombe.com/2012/03/red-meat-mortality-the-usual-bad-science/

http://www.robbwolf.com/2012/03/14/red-meat-part-healthy-diet/

I recently discovered the attached video and was so impressed with its message that I thought you too would appreciate and benefit from this valuble information, which is very well presented. I recently incorporated this information into a talk I gave. I encourage you to spend the brief amount of time it takes to watch this and to pass it along to your friends and family.

We are continually bombarded with recommendations to do this and that and we forget to listen to what our intuition is telling us. We are all different and not every diet/lifestyle/treatment program will work the same for every individual. It may be a good idea to ditch all of the advice and diet books you have read and begin to truly listen to your inner voice and what your body is trying to tell you. Some may not completely hear the message but if they keep honestly listening, the message will be heard (a little metaphysical I know).

We know the basics of what is good and what is bad for us, we just need to put this information into practice. Incorporate the simple recommendations from the talk provided and you’ll be in much better shape than if you choose to ignore it. Is there any way you can limit your sitting and sleeping to 23 1/2 hours/day? I think you can. Make YOU a priority!

Get Movin’,

Chris

http://blog.drsinatra.com/blog/heart-health-nutrition/power-of-exercise

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/29/why-its-so-important-to-keep-moving/

Thanks Dr. Nagy

In an effort to stay slim, burn calories and generally avoid weight gain, we’re all familiar with the basics. Eat right, exercise, sleep 7-8 hour/night, handle your stress, etc. I would like to add to this list an option that is not widely known or yet fully researched. This new method is a bio-hack (a short-cut to improve one’s biology) that can make a considerable difference for those brave enough to try it. You can consider yourself way ahead of the health and wellness curve on this one.

We all carry two types of fat, white and brown. White fat is the fat that is responsible for the obesity epidemic we currently face worldwide (beer bellies, muffin tops, bagel butts etc.). Brown fat is a metabolically active fat that basically tells our body to burn fat for energy and to generate body heat. Brown fat is found primarily in infants and hibernating animals. It is present in adults, mostly in the neck and shoulder regions, but questions of its function and activity are still under investigation. Recent research clearly demonstrates the effectiveness of optimally functioning brown fat and its role in thermogenesis and weight loss/maintenance.

You better believe the drug companies are looking into ways to take advantage of mimicking brown fat and attempting to create a drug that will provide similar effects as a magic weight loss pill. One need not wait until if and when this is discovered, there are actions you can implement now to increase the presence and function of brown fat in your body. The question is, will you want to make the effort to harness the power of brown fat?

The best way to increase and optimize the function of brown fat is COLD exposure. Cold exposure has many mechanisms by which it increases metabolism, many of which are extremely beneficial to the system (improved thyroid function, lowered cortisol levels, endorphin production and many others). Michael Phelps eats 12,000 calories/day while training. It doesn’t seem possible to eat that much and not gain weight, except when you consider the fact that he trains 3-4 hours/day in cold water that is 24X more thermally conductive than air. In other words, not only is Phelps exercising, he is optimizing his heat loss and brown fat production by exposing himself to cold temperatures in a thermally conductive medium. Another great example of this is how ripped Rocky was in Rocky IV because he did all of his training in the Siberian snow (oh wait, that was just a movie wasn’t it?).

Options to consider for cold exposure are many but the best and most effective (and most painful) seems to be bodily immersion in ice water (temperature 50-55 degrees) for a period of 20-30 minutes. Another option is cold showers, which definitely will wake one up in the morning. It has been reported the using ice packs on the back of the neck and shoulders can stimulate the formation of brown fat, though not as well as immersion therapy.  As a matter of convenience, one may even purchase an ice vest and neck wrap to utilize daily to lower core body temperature and stimulate brown fat production. There are many other ways to expose oneself to the cold but due to the thermal conduction issues, immersion is the best. These modalities make the body more metabolically active in trying to warm itself, thus increasing metabolic rate and burning more calories.

The science behind the above is relatively new and more information will be available as time passes. I recommend looking over the links below for more education. I would not recommend engaging in a program such as this if you have heart disease or other medical problems. The rewards beyond weight loss can be significant, if you’re up to the challenge and cold exposure that this requires. Since 2/3 of the country is overweight, maybe if we get this message out there, it will convince everyone to turn their thermostat down to 65 degrees? Enjoy the info below and if you ever thought of joining the polar bear club, now you have a legitimate reason.

Shiveringly Yours,

Chris

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/25/health/brown-fat-burns-ordinary-fat-study-finds.html?_r=1

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1890175,00.html

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/health/genetics/brown-fat-revelations-may-lead-to-new-weight-loss-drugs-670440?click=pm_latest

http://gettingstronger.org/wp-content/plugins/wordpress-toolbar/toolbar.php?wptbto=http%3A%2F%2Fgettingstronger.org%2F2010%2F03%2Fcold-showers%2F%23more-20&wptbhash=aHR0cDovL2dldHRpbmdzdHJvbmdlci5vcmcvMjAxMC8wMy9jb2xkLXNob3dlcnMvPHdwdGI%2BQ29sZCBzaG93ZXJzPHdwdGI%2BaHR0cDovL2dldHRpbmdzdHJvbmdlci5vcmc8d3B0Yj5HZXR0aW5nIFN0cm9uZ2Vy

http://gettingstronger.org/2012/01/the-iceman/#more-3678

Cholesterol – a substance that we are all familiar with as a major risk factor for heart disease, or not? The allegation of cholesterol as an evil villain has been preached to us on numerous occasions over the past 50 years. The evidence directly implicating cholesterol as a major cause of heart disease, when critically examined, does not stand up to scrutiny. This Lipid/Cholesterol hypothesis is a faulty dictum brought to us primarily by Ancel Keys, PhD., in the early 1950’s and has been propagated ever since. Many studies   have demonstrated no statistically significant correlation between fat and cholesterol intake and heart disease, yet we continue to use the Cholesterol/Heart Disease hypothesis as a basis for recommending medical treatment to lower cholesterol levels and prevent heart disease. Did you know that 50-75% of people who have a heart attack have “normal” cholesterol levels?

Cholesterol is an important and ubiquitous substance in the human body and is responsible for many vital functions. Cholesterol is a major component of every cell in the body and is a critical substance in the brain, as 50-60% of the dry weight of the brain is composed of cholesterol.  Cholesterol is utilized by the body to produce important hormones, such as testosterone, estrogen, cortisone, vitamin D and others – all critical to optimal function. Cholesterol is required by the liver to produce bile, which digests fat. Adequate cholesterol levels support the immune system in the fight against both infection and cancer. Of particular importance, cholesterol is the key substance found in the insulating/myelin sheaths of our nerves and brain.

These many functions demonstrate why cholesterol is a vital component to an optimally functioning body. When we artificially lower our cholesterol levels, particularly with statin medications, we risk damage to all of the above systems. The focus on cholesterol as a major cause of heart disease has, in many ways, distracted us from fully focusing on some of the more important causes of heart disease, our lifestyle and dietary choices. Inflammation plays a significant role in heart disease, and things that increase systemic inflammation, such as poor food choices, smoking, diabetes/insulin resistance, inactivity, elevated homocysteine levels, high blood pressure and stress, may be bigger factors in heart disease than high cholesterol.

We live in what could be categorized as a “one disease, one drug” culture. Many of us accept the false dogma that health comes in the form of a pill that we take each day. Forget lifestyle modification; there’s a pill we can take to make up for our wrong choices. Thoughts like these are in many ways responsible for a number of illnesses we’re currently dealing with.

Statin medications, successful at lowering cholesterol levels, are one of the accepted current treatments of choice for prevention of heart disease.  However, many of the studies “proving” the benefit of statins rely on statistical manipulation to prove value in the treatment or prevention of heart disease. Even the package insert for the very medicine being used to “prevent” heart disease states that statins do not reduce all cause mortality. This means that statins do not increase lifespan when compared to placebo. Statins may slightly decrease the risk of heart disease, but if, as research shows, their use contributes to the development of another disease, it becomes a zero sum game. Why replace one disease for another when the ultimate final outcome is no different?

If  told that patients taking a statin drug resulted in 2 people in 100 having a heart attack over a 3.4-year period and patients not taking a statin drug resulted in 3 people in 100 having a heart attack over the same 3.4-year period, those odds wouldn’t impress anyone as very favorable. Yet, according to the way the statistics are reported, this represents a 33% reduction in cardiac risk (1 divided by 3) according to the researchers. A 33% risk reduction sounds significant, but what this really means is that 1 person out of 100 taking a statin over a 3.4 year period was spared a heart attack compared to those not taking a statin over that same time period. Not as impressive or convincing as stating a 33% reduction in cardiac risk.

The number needed to treat (NNT) is what should be considered when looking at the usefulness of statins or any drugs. The NNT tells us how many people need to be treated with a drug to help just one person. As in the case above, the NNT for heart disease prevention is 100 people being treated for 3.4 years to prevent one heart attack as compared to doing nothing. In essence, 99 other people are taking the same drug and facing the health risks and expense from taking the drug, with no benefit for themselves. The risk/benefit ratio needs to be considered in the use of these drugs. In other studies, it has been shown that it would take 250 people that are low-risk for heart disease, taking a statin for 5 years to prevent 1 heart attack, according to the NNT.

The true, primary treatment indication for the use of statin medications is for the treatment of middle-aged men under the age of 65 who have cardiac disease or have had a heart attack. Statins have not been found to be useful for primary prevention of cardiac disease and have demonstrated no benefit in reducing all cause mortality in those without a previous history of heart disease. The benefit of statin use in women is even more questionable. Extrapolations are made as to the benefit of statin use for primary prevention of heart disease, but a recent thorough review by the highly regarded Cochrane Collaboration concluded that statin drugs show no benefit for heart disease prevention among those without diagnosed heart disease, a serious statement considering their many noted side effects.

With the trumped-up benefits of cholesterol-lowering medication, one would think that there would be substantially more clinical benefit than what the actual numbers show. There have been over 900 studies demonstrating the risk and adverse effects of statin drugs, yet they are frequently handed out like candy, some authorities have even recommended putting them in the water supply or giving them to children!  Statin drugs can lead to diabetes, significant muscle aches and pains, muscle destruction, peripheral neuropathy, increase in liver enzymes, lowered immune response, increased cancer risk, erectile dysfunction, heart failure, depression, and dementia (and many others). Many of the above symptoms are associated with the aging process and we accept them as such. The statement has been put forth that stains accelerate the aging process.

Vitamin D and especially CoQ10 depletion are two of the nutrient deficiencies associated with statin use. CoQ10 is a key nutrient that powers our muscles and keeps them functioning well. The organ with the highest concentration of CoQ10 in the body is the heart. It makes no sense taking a drug to “protect” our heart that depletes the very source of energy that the heart relies upon for function. It should come as no surprise that an increasing number of cases of congestive heart failure are seen in those who have been on long-term statin treatment.

The value and importance of cholesterol in the human body cannot be overlooked. Diet has little to do with cholesterol levels, other than the fact that increased carbohydrate intake is associated with higher small or bad LDL particle production, the form of cholesterol most frequently associated with heart disease. 75-80% of the cholesterol in our bodies is made by our body and only 15-20% is related to dietary intake. Many studies have failed to directly correlate dietary intake with total cholesterol levels. Some studies have even demonstrated a lowering of cholesterol levels with increased cholesterol consumption. I am not recommending that you eat poorly, as there are many mechanisms by which diet creates disease. I am pointing out that cholesterol levels are not linearly correlated to dietary fat consumption.

An elevated cholesterol level is not necessarily a disease state unto itself, but more than likely a symptom of metabolic derangement in the body. Blaming cholesterol for heart disease is like blaming a scab for the wound it is covering or blaming a fireman for the fire he has come to extinguish. Cholesterol is found at the scene of the crime but is not the guilty party. Inflammation, from one source or another, is what must be identified; cholesterol is just cleaning up the mess as a biological bandage.

The currently recommended cholesterol guidelines are not based on a particular scientific study, but on the consensus opinion of 9 physicians, 8 of whom have ties and have received payment from the drug companies that manufacture statins. Science should not be about consensus but about facts. When presented with “scientific evidence” of the significant benefit of statins, it is always worthwhile to investigate the funding source of the studies cited. It is amazing to note the positive correlation  between statin benefit and industry involvement/financial support of the study and its authors. Bias is rampant in industry funded/coordinated studies (as opposed to independently funded studies) and in my opinion, seriously damages and taints the results of these studies. If you are told you have to get your cholesterol level below 200, you will not be able to find a scientific study supporting this specific recommendation (it’s a consensus statement). Current guidelines make patients out of an estimated 40 million or more people who, prior to the new recommendations, were considered healthy. In essence, a majority of the population now requires “treatment” for a “disease” they didn’t even know they have.

In closing, I realize this information will likely shock and annoy some, but presenting the other side of the story on the data that is available on this topic is important. Are there studies to refute what I have written above? Sure there are. Are there studies to support my line of reasoning? Most certainly there are. I do not ask that you take my word for it, but I also ask that you do not take anyone else’s word either, unless they have done the research and have no vested interest in the current dogma.

Controversy abounds on the topic of cholesterol and heart disease, so please reflect on the above information and investigate with an open mind. There are many paths to cardiovascular disease beyond cholesterol and these too must be considered in the overall picture.  I suggest reading The Cholesterol Delusion, by cardiologist Ernest Curtis, MD, or Ignore the Awkward by Uffe Ravsnkov, MD, PhD. Spacedoc.com is also a great resource for further research.

The comments in this article are my thoughts and opinions based on my reading of the medical literature. They are no substitute for consultation with your own physician and should in no way be construed as medical advice. The decision to start, continue or discontinue any drug regimen is a serious one and should be a decision made after careful discussion with your own physician.

Looking at things through an unfiltered lens,

Chris

http://www.salisburypost.com/Opinion/022612-insight-nagy-cholesterol-statins-qcd?fb_comment_id=fbc_10150705752534136_22784130_10150712878669136#f19a1a5545a148

http://www.greenmedinfo.com/print/blog/consumer-alert-300-health-problems-linked-statin-drugs?utm_source=www.GreenMedInfo.com&utm_campaign=f5d1625d85-Greenmedinfo&utm_medium=email

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jacob-teitelbaum-md/statins-cholesterol_b_910841.html

http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/statins/statins-and-diabetes/#more-4789

http://www.spacedoc.com/

Cutting through all of the “expert” dietary information and taking a 100,000 foot view rather than a 10 foot view, I would like for you to consider the volume of information available connecting proper dietary habits with the genetic record. This is not exclusively about grains alone, but about what we should be consuming in general to have an optimal diet. I have linked a lecture by Dr. Loren Cordain, titled, Origins and Evolution of the Western Diet: Health Implications for the 21st century. This talk is an outstanding representation of the anthropological record tracing our dietary roots.

The talk is 1 hour but well worth the small investment of time to hear this information. I would encourage you to listen to the question and answer session, as there are some valuable pearls contained there also. I know that this is not the typical 3-5 minute video we’re used to watching but I assure you the information is worthwhile and eye opening. I try to provide relevant guidance to what I believe is important and diet is ultimately the most important topic to consider. Eat like your life depends on it – because it does.

I frequently joke with Jille that Dr. Mercola is copying me with the posts he publishes and today he has once again followed suit with the post that I’ve linked below (about grains). I say this jokingly, as my thoughts and comments stand on the shoulders of the many who have made this information their life’s work and research. I am just trying to spread the message. It is hard enough to uncover some of this information and then know what to believe. I attempt to back up my thoughts with supportive information and hope you find this useful.

If you watch nothing else this weekend, take the time to watch Dr. Cordain’s lecture. It’s another piece of the puzzle.

To Your Health,

Chris

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/01/21/grains-causing-gut-leaks.aspx?e_cid=20120121_DNL_art_1

P.S. For Comic relief – it does mention food?