Welcome

Who says we have to suffer...to live a healthy happy vibrant life?

Red wine and dark chocolate... might seem decadent...but these guilty pleasures also might help us live longer...and healthier lives. Red wine and dark chocolate definitely improve an evening..but they also contain resveratrol..which lowers blood sugar. Red wine is a great source of catechins..which boost protective HDL cholesterol. Green tea? Protects your brain..helps you live longer..and soothes your spirit.

Food for Thought, the blog, is about living the good life...a life we create with our thoughts and our choices...and having fun the whole while!

I say lets make the thoughts good ones..and let the choices be healthy...exciting...and delicious! Bon Appetit!

Monday, September 9, 2013

Get your Greek on!

Eating a Mediterranean diet -- rich in produce, olive oil and fish -- improves brain functioning and lowers the risk of Alzheimer's disease, according to a new review of the available research.
The review, which you can see here, was published in the journal Epidemiology. It includes 12 studies, nine of which showed an association between eating a Mediterranean diet and having lower Alzheimer's risk, improved cognitive functioning and lower rate of cognitive decline.
Missing however, were any links between the diet and development of mild cognitive impairment.
Mediterranean food is both delicious and nutritious, and the systematic review shows it may help to protect the aging brain and reduce the risk of dementia.

Other recent research has connected eating a Mediterranean-style diet with a lower risk of diabetes, longer life, and a reduced risk of heart disease.

Green Tea Boosts Brain Power.


Sometimes, a good cup of tea really can clear your head and help you think more clearly. A daily habit of green tea may even promote the growth of brain cells and revitalize memory and learning capabilities.
Researchers at the University of California, Davis, have been studying how green tea influences brain function and boosts memory. Now Chinese researchers have confirmed findings that Green tea favorably affects the generation of brain cells and provides benefits for memory and spatial learning.

The compound in green tea responsible for boosting brain power is a chemical called epigallocatechin-3 gallate (EGCG). It’s an antioxidant that improves cognitive function by promoting growth and function of neurons (nerve cells) in the brain.

References

Green tea epigallocatechin-3-gallate (EGCG) promotes neural progenitor cell proliferation and sonic hedgehog pathway activation during adult hippocampal neurogenesis. Molecular Nutrition & Food Research Volume 56, Issue 8 1292–1303

Neural effects of green tea extract on dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (2012) 66, 1187–1192;

Friday, August 9, 2013

Harmful, hidden toxins in the diets of pregnant women


UC Riverside study suggests that prenatal health care professionals do more to advise patients to avoid tap water, certain types of fish, caffeine, and canned goods that may put developing babies at risk.

Pregnant women regularly consume food and beverages containing toxins believed to pose potential risks to developing fetuses, according to researchers at the University of California, Riverside, suggesting that health care providers must do more to counsel their patients about the dangers of hidden toxins in the food supply.
In a peer-reviewed study published in the Nutrition Journal - "Consumption habits of pregnant women and implications for developmental biology: a survey of predominantly Hispanic women in California" - a team of psychologists from UC Riverside and UC San Diego found that the diets of pregnant Hispanic women included tuna, salmon, canned foods, tap water, caffeine, alcohol and over-the-counter medications that contain substances known to cause birth defects.
The study is unique in that it highlights the unseen dangers of consuming toxins in food and beverages that are not typically thought of as unhealthy for a fetus, said Sarah Santiago, a Ph.D. student in psychology at UCR. It also contributes to the body of literature aimed at assessing dietary habits of both Hispanic and non-Hispanic pregnant women.
"Unlike alcohol and nicotine, which carry a certain stigma along with surgeon general warnings on the packaging, tuna, canned foods, caffeine, and a handful of other foods and beverages with associated developmental effects are not typically thought of as unsafe," Santiago explained. "Hopefully, this study will encourage health care providers to keep pregnant women well informed as to the possible dangers of unhealthy consumption habits."
The research team - Kelly Huffman, assistant professor of psychology at UC Riverside and the paper's senior author; Santiago; and UCSD undergraduate student Grace Park - surveyed 200 pregnant or recently pregnant women at a private medical group in Downey, Calif., between December 2011 and December 2012. The women ranged in age from 18 to about 40, with Hispanic women accounting for 87 percent of the group. Nearly all had a high school degree, and about one-fourth had a college or post-graduate degree. More than two-thirds had an annual income of $50,000 or less.
Using a food questionnaire, participants reported how often and when during their pregnancy they ate certain foods, drank certain beverages, and ingested prescription and over-the-counter medications. Nearly all of the women reported eating meat while pregnant, with about three-quarters of them eating fish, typically tuna, tilapia and salmon. All reported eating fresh fruit, but fewer than one-third ate the recommended amount of more than one serving a day. Three-fourths ate canned goods, particularly fruits, vegetables and soup. Most reported drinking water, with 12 percent consuming tap water. Eighty percent consumed caffeinated beverages, and about 6 percent reported drinking alcohol sometime during their pregnancy. Most reported taking prenatal vitamins. Nearly half reported taking an over-the-counter medication - primarily acetaminophen - at least once and most reported taking prescription medications at least once.
The results are concerning, the researchers said.
"Consumption of tuna, salmon, canned goods, sugary desserts, fast foods, and drinking of tap water, caffeinated beverages, and alcoholic beverages during pregnancy have been deemed unhealthy due to the appearance of environmental toxins found to have harmful effects in the developing offspring," the researchers wrote.
Tuna contains methylmercury, and prenatal exposure has been associated with numerous developmental deficits involving attention, verbal learning, motor function and delayed performance. "Staggering" levels of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) have been found in farmed salmon. Prenatal exposure to PCBs has been linked to lower birth weights, smaller head circumferences, and abnormal reflex abilities in newborns and to mental impairment in older children. Metal food cans are lined with a plastic that contains Bisphenol A (BPA), which leaches from the lining in cans into the food. Prenatal exposure to BPA has been associated in animal studies with hyperactivity, aggression and reproductive problems.
"This study has found that income is inversely correlated with canned food consumption, suggesting that women of low socio-economic status in particular may be especially at risk," the UC Riverside psychologists found.
Tap water also contains prenatal toxins. In Downey, eight pollutants found in drinking water exceed the health guidelines set by federal and state agencies. Some of those contaminants are known to result in central nervous system defects, oral cleft defects, neural tube defects, low birth weight and risk of fetal death, the researchers said. Pregnant women should be encouraged to drink filtered or bottled water in areas where contamination levels are high, they advised.
Also problematic was the level of caffeine consumption, the research team found. Caffeine consumed during pregnancy is associated with fetal mortality, birth defects and decreased birth weights. Animal studies have found developmental delays, abnormal neuromotor activity, and neurochemical disruptions.
A handful of women in the study - 5.8 percent - reported drinking alcohol at some time during their pregnancy, less than the national estimate of 7.6 percent. Maternal drinking rates are highest among white women ages 35 to 44.
"We do not know whether this is something unique to Hispanic women, or ubiquitous among women of multiple ethnicities," the researchers wrote. "The implications of this research are twofold: Women of childbearing age hoping to conceive should be advised to eliminate all alcohol consumption, as effects of maternal drinking have dire consequences in the first trimester when the mother may not know she is pregnant. ... It is also clear that prenatal medical professionals should discourage the consumption of dangerous foods, beverages and medications that women commonly report consuming during pregnancy."
Not enough research has been conducted on certain substances to merit fail-proof labels of teratogenicity - that is, whether a substance causes developmental malformations. "Because regulation of prenatal consumption demands a very high level of evidence of teratogenicity, little-researched substances often go unregulated and health care professionals assume they are healthy," Santiago explained. "The problem could also lie in reduced access to health care, or time constraints in prenatal consultations. Perhaps health care providers are informed, but fail to pass the information on to their clients for lack of time or because they assume the clients are already informed."
Teratogenic substances often have subtle, though serious, effects that manifest later in development. "Research suggesting that a given substance does not cause physical abnormalities at birth may be misinterpreted as a green light for consumption - a grave mistake, considering that other research may exist demonstrating the long-term neural or behavioral abnormalities that result from consuming that substance during pregnancy," Santiago added.
The research team continues to collect data on beliefs and attitudes about consumption of these substances during pregnancy in a search for clues as to why women continue to eat these substances, and where in the system interventions would be most appropriate.

Sunday, July 28, 2013

Shouldn't Nature Have Rights?

We privilege humans, while excluding other members of the biotic community. A more expansive system of governance would extend rights of sorts and in some fashion to species, rivers, landscapes, ecologies, and trees, as legal scholar Christopher Stone once proposed. In Thomas Berry’s words: “We have established our human governance with little regard for the need to integrate it with the functional order of the planet itself.” In fact, from our bodies to our global civilization we are part of a worldwide parliament of beings, systems, and forces far beyond our understanding. We are kin to all that ever was and all that ever will be and must learn what that fact means for governance.

Friday, July 12, 2013

Fish oils and prostate cancer. Are supplements dangerous?



I have been asked to explain the reported “findings” of the SELECT study. This is the study generating new headlines claiming that fish oil supplements are linked to an increased risk of aggressive prostate cancer. 

For starters, the men in the SELECT study were not given fish oil supplements. What the results were reporting were levels of EPA, DPA and DHA omega-3s in blood, and cancer risk. And it is very important to note that the difference of omega-3 levels when comparing the healthy (control) group and the combined cancers group was nearly insignificant.

That difference is 4.66% in the combined cancer group versus 4.48% in the control group. It is a minute variance. Eating one additional serving of fish compared to the control group could result in that difference. Again no fish oil supplements were given in the study, so to blame omega-3 supplements for the reported findings is totally irresponsible.

Another point to consider is this. The reported omega-3 levels in any of the SELECT participants are not high levels. They are only slightly higher than the levels in those who consume a western diet typically average. Therefore any country that consumes a diet based on fish would have incredibly high levels of aggressive prostate cancer, and that is not the case.

What does the science really say about fish consumption or omega-3 levels and risk of prostate cancer?
The studies almost uniformly show that eating fish or having higher plasma levels of omega-3 is protective.  Several large scale epidemiological studies, including those looking at native Japanese men, Inuit men and people that live in South America, have shown that a high intake of fish and a high omega-3 status is linked to a lower incidence of many cancers including prostate cancer.
In a 2010 meta-analysis published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition by Szymanski et al, the authors pooled data from four studies on fish consumption and death from prostate cancer and found a 63% decrease in risk for high fish consumption.
One must be very careful with making decisions based on the latest headlines. People do have a tendency to make decisions based on the last study or news advertised, rather than the sum of evidence of many studies published on a specific topic. But we must not do this. We must take into consideration the totality of evidence that we have on a topic, not just the latest headline on CNN.
In addition, studies should be read critically – there are inherent flaws in most of them.
The findings from this most recently reported study: Brasky et al. 2013 ( SELECT) are from an observational study (looking back in time) and observational studies do not prove cause and effect.
Scientific studies that are prospective in design are considered more important in weighing total evidence and give us more useful guidance in our choices on diet or supplements that might improve our health.
Are there more useful, prospective studies that demonstrate protective benefits of omega 3 fatty acids against prostate cancer?
Yes there are quite a few. Lets consider some of those.
Researchers investigated the effect of dietary fish intake amongst 6272 Swedish men who were followed-up for 30 years. That study reported that men who ate no fish had a two to three-fold increase in the risk of developing prostate cancer compared with those who consumed large amounts of fish in their diet.
Another prospective cohort study based on the Physician’s Health Study found that fish consumption (≥5 times per week) was not related to prostate cancer risk but was protective of prostate cancer–specific death.
Other studies have suggested lower prostate cancer risk with Omega 3 fatty acids from fish in Swedish men.
And this study showed lower prostate cancer risk with Omega 3 fatty acids from fish in Japanese and Brazilian men..
A large prospective cohort established in 1986 looked at 51,529 American men, 40 – 75 years of age, completed a mailed questionnaire about demographic and medical information found that a high intake of fish was associated with a lower risk of metastatic prostate cancer. A similar association was also found for dietary marine fatty acids from food.
An important clinical study published by a group at the Harvard School of Public Health examined the link between dietary fish consumption and the risk of metastatic prostate cancer. This paper reported results from the Health Professionals Follow-up Study that involved 47,882 men over twelve years. During the twelve years, 2,483 cases of prostate cancer were identified. Of these, 617 were advanced and 278 were metastatic. Eating fish more than three times a week reduced the risk of prostate cancer but had an even greater impact on the risk of metastatic prostate cancer. For each additional 500 mg of marine omega-3 consumed, the risk of metastatic disease decreased by 24%!
And again, in the 2010 meta-analysis (an analysis of multiple studies) Szymanski and his team found that a significant 63% reduction in prostate cancer-specific mortality in those that consumed fish but no link between eating lots of fish and men’s risk of developing prostate cancer.
When one considers the larger picture, the headlines claiming that men who consume omega-3 supplements are at increased risk of prostate cancer, based on one study where no one used omega-3 supplements, and where levels of omega-3s were only 0.02% in variance among cancer cases and healthy cases, seem preposterous.


Tuesday, June 18, 2013

Can diet help fight prostate cancer? The Men’s Eating and Living (MEAL) study.


Few things can make a man feel less in control of his life than being told he has cancer. Making healthier choices — including what food you eat — can help regain some control, and make you feel better in the process. Can adopting a healthier diet help fight prostate cancer? That’s a question men newly diagnosed with prostate cancer often ask their doctors.
Several studies have shown that in countries where men eat a “Western” diet containing a large amount of meat, the incidence of prostate cancer, especially aggressive prostate cancer, is higher than in countries where plant foods are a primary part of the diet. Unfortunately, these studies weren’t designed to prove cause and effect. So for now, definitive answers about prostate cancer and diet aren’t yet in — although researchers are actively studying this topic.
Investigators have launched a federally funded national study to see whether a diet that’s higher in plant foods and lower in animal foods than the typical Western diet will help control tumor growth in men with early-stage prostate cancer.
Participants in the Men’s Eating and Living (MEAL) study will try to eat nine servings of fruits and vegetables daily — significantly more than the three to four servings consumed each day by the typical American man — as well as two servings of whole grains and one serving of beans or other legumes.

This clinical trial will include men ages 50-80 years who have small, low-grade tumors and who have opted to have their condition followed (active surveillance) rather than undergoing immediate treatment. Researchers will randomly assign participants to telephone counseling about how to achieve the dietary MEAL goals or to a control group that receives standard dietary advice for Americans.
During the two-year study, the investigators will collect blood samples to assess levels of antioxidants and nutrients, and then monitor the men with PSA tests and prostate biopsies to determine whether the cancer is progressing. A pilot study showed the approach is workable, and that with enough telephone prompting men can increase their intake of vegetables and other healthy foods. To learn more about the larger phase III MEAL study, or to enroll, visit HERE  and search for Trial NCT 01238172.