Health Editorial For Those Concerned About A Healthy Lifestyle

These Two Nutrients Will Solve the Majority of Your Existing and Potential Health Problems
Dr. Oz Under Fire
Early 20th Century Food in the 21st Century--Retro is Better

---

These Two Nutrients Will Solve the Majority of Your Existing and Potential Health Problems

Uncontrolled Technology

Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, and continuing through the Technological Revolution and Information Age, and into the mind-blowing science of the 21st century, there has been an unwanted but ever-present companion alongside of technological and medical advancement. This companion is many times only discovered after many people develop serious health issues and suffer, or tragically, die.

This companion was never planned. Many times it was an unforeseen and unplanned consequence of technological innovation. But sometimes it resulted from unwise management or actions by mankind. When change comes about by a willful disregard for nature, and many times a planned rejection of nature, negative consequences will always arise.

What is this companion? It is chronic disease. Look at what the 21st century has brought along with amazing technology and medical advances: global obesity, increased cancer and heart disease, escalating Alzheimer's disease, osteoporosis, ADD (attention deficit disorder), ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder), autism, depression, and others.

Take for example what happened in the 1970s. Science mistakenly believed that saturated fat was the cause of America's escalating heart disease crisis. So what did the medical establishment recommend? Cut back or eliminate things like red meat and butter, and replace them with vegetable oil and margarine. All of a sudden, after decades of beef and butter on America's breakfast and dinner tables, cow products became public enemy number one.

Now grain in general and corn in particular were king. Vegetable oil and a low-fat diet were seen as cures for heart disease. And what was the consequence? Heart disease continued unabated and America saw the birth of the obesity epidemic. A 'scientific' innovation which was thought would accomplish the demise of heart disease not only did not cure heart disease, but caused the birth of a scourge which is at the foundation of so much chronic disease.

Also around that time, the meat industry thought that they could improve on nature. Towards that goal they devised CAFO (concentrated animal feeding operation.) This innovation was brought about to increase 'efficiency.'

Cows, pigs, and chickens were kept confined for the greater part of their lives in overcrowded pens and enclosures. They were fed 'food' unnatural to their diet like grain and animal parts. And because the meat industry wanted to maximize profits, the animals were given hormones to increase their growth and milk production.

Since CAFO inherently breeds disease and extreme discomfort and injury to the animals, they were constantly given antibiotics to combat sickness. And the human consequence for this modern advancement? Disease and negative hormonal shifts in humans. The pesticides, hormones, and antibiotics are passed along from the animals and into our meats, butter, and milk.

Score another point for scientific advancement!

And what is America's answer to these chronic diseases brought on by advancing technology? Is it the removal of the cause? Or maybe working alongside of nature so that it would be a win-win situation? No. Neither one.

America's solution to chronic disease brought along by technology is symptom treatment by pharmaceuticals. And what is the consequence of pharmaceutical drugs? Secondary health problems. Look at the Vioxx fiasco. A pharmaceutical drug was devised to lower cholesterol levels. This drug caused the injury and deaths of thousands of innocent people who were led astray by the hype and credentials of the drug cartels.

Those who survived Vioxx now have medical problems which their doctors attempt to solve by prescribing yet other pharmaceutical drugs.

The chronic diseases which Americans, and those citizens of other countries who are heavily influenced by American technology, are saddled with drastically reduced nutrient levels. And this is a direct result of 20th and 21st century advancements.

Two nutrients in particular are of paramount importance. These nutrients were found in abundance in Americans of early to mid-20th century and earlier. Their demise was caused as much by misinformation and profiteering as by attempting to out-do nature.

The two nutrients are in my estimation the two most crucial that a person could have. If I had to recommend just two nutrients--they would be vitamin D and omega-3 fatty acids.

The Sunshine Vitamin

Find all the health benefits of vitamin D here.

Vitamin D is also known as the sunshine vitamin. That's because it is not a true vitamin. The best source of vitamin D is not any food or liquid, but the sun itself. But since medical science (there you have it--20th century ignorance masquerading as science) has demonized the sun, the majority of Americans are terrified of it.

Medical science would have you believe that the sun is the major cause of skin cancer. That is simply not true. (This article will reveal the truth about what's really behind the escalating cases of skin cancer.)

The reasons that most Americans are suffering from sub-optimal vitamin D levels are: (1) inadequate sun exposure (due to sunscreens, indoors too much, location on globe) and to a much lesser extent (2) inadequate food intake. Realistically, the only factors that can be easily changed are sunscreens and being cooped up indoors.

For all intents and purposes we cannot easily change where we live. For people who live in the northern United States, inadequate sunshine is the norm from September through mid-April. In global terms, if you live above 30 degrees northern latitude or below 30 degrees southern latitude, your sun exposure is limited and not enough for its health benefits. You must supplement. Find your latitude here.

Be advised that sunny and hot weather is not necessarily an indication of adequate amounts of UVB rays from the sun.

Vitamin D levels can drop as much as 50 percent in the winter months. This affects your immune system tremendously. This is the reason why this season is called the cold and flu season. With a suffering immune system, you don't have adequate immune protection to fight the common cold or the flu.

If global vitamin D levels were at optimal levels, 600,000 cases of breast and colorectal cancer could be prevented (150,000 total in the United States alone.) Vitamin D would prevent chronic diseases that claim close to one million lives annually.

What makes vitamin D so powerful and effective is the fact that the entire human body contains receptors that respond to vitamin D. Almost every one of your cells has these receptors. They are found from your brain to your bones.

Optimal vitamin D levels helps to prevent as many as 16 different cancers from developing. These cancers include pancreatic, lung, beast, ovarian, prostate, and colon. Vitamin D influences heart disease, diabetes, inflammatory bowel disease, rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis, osteoporosis, colds and the flu too.

Seemingly every day medical science is discovering a sickness or disease which adequate levels of vitamin D can prevent.

UVB rays from the sun produces up to 80 percent of the vitamin D your body needs. This form of vitamin D is D3 or cholecalciferol.

The only recourse you have if you are not located in the sunshine latitudes of the globe is to supplement or get access to a safe tanning bed. If you decide to purchase a tanning bed for your home, 'click' the banner below. Not all tanning beds are safe, and you will learn what to look for in a quality and safe bed.

The only downside to supplementing with vitamin D3 is it by-passes your body's natural feedback system. Vitamin D is fat-soluble. That means that you can build up an excess of it. This can be harmful. UVB rays from the sun and from tanning beds which mimic the sun can not build up to dangerous levels in your body. Your innate feedback system kicks in.

It is recommended that you have your vitamin D levels checked every so often when you supplement. Read this article to find out the test you should ask for, and what your optimum level of vitamin D should be.

The Fatty Acid You Can't Do Without

The second nutrient which most Americans are deficient in is omega-3 fatty acid. There are several factors which influences low omega-3 levels. The factor which has the greatest impact is the omega-6 to omega-3 ratio. It is important that you receive enough omega-6. Unfortunately though, almost everyone gets too much.

Omega-6 is in grains like corn, soybean, canola, and sunflower. The primary feed of CAFO which is also known as factory farm, is grain. Chickens, cattle, and pigs are all fed grain. Even farmed fish are given grain.

All of your conventionally sourced meat, milk, eggs, and butter comes from grain-fed animals. In addition, your vegetable oils comes from grain. Grain is composed of omega-6 polyunsaturated fats. Omega-6 comes from the seeds of plants.

The ideal balance of omega-6 to omega-3 fatty acids should be from 1:1 to 2:1. It has been estimated that the typical American diet supplies ratios anywhere from 20:1 to 50:1. The switch to vegetable oil precipitated the tremendous increase in omega-6 consumption.

According to the USDA (United States Department of Agriculture), America's daily consumption of omega-6s more than doubled--going from approximately 7 grams to 18. The AMA (American Heart Association says that heart disease has risen in parallel with the rise in consumption of seed fats (omega-6s.)

A great portion of your brain is composed of omega-3 fatty acids. They help children who have learning disabilities, reduce prison violence, and improve a person's daily mood. Omega-3s lower the risk of developing heart disease, arthritis, and several forms of cancer.

Read more about the benefits of omega-3 and the harm of too much omega-6 here.

Technology--But Not At Your Health's Expense

Can technology and optimum health co-exist? Yes they can. But we can't wait for big business to do it. They are driven by profit and have the help of the government behind them. But you as an individual can persuade the meat, milk, and pharmaceutical industries to be more environmentally- and human health-friendly. You can withdraw your support from them by refusing to purchase factory-farmed meat, milk, butter, and eggs.

You can also make yourself sick-proof by exercising and eating organic produce and grass-fed meat. Once you get yourself healthy you will achieve a healthy body weight, and find your health issues disappearing. This will allow you to wean yourself off the expensive and dangerous medications you are currently on.

Only recently has the government begun correcting the mistake made in the 1970s with hydrogenation--trans fats. The culprit for the unhealthy levels of LDL (bad) cholesterol was once placed on saturated fat. It is still getting a bad rap. Trans fats are now banned by a few city governments.

As is not surprising with anything the government sponsors, trans fats has a loop-hole. Processed food producers are allowed to claim zero trans fats if a serving on their product has less than a half a gram.

Here is how you can avoid trans fats; don't eat any processed food; if you're not willing to go that far, read the ingredient list. If you see the word hydrogenated, it contains trans fats.

America's sick-care system is built on a foundation of unhealthy food, pharmaceutical drugs, a broken health care system, and government agency collaborators. Food and health care forms a vicious cycle. You get sick from the processed food and are prescribed pharmaceutical drugs. These drugs have multiple side effects which produce other medical conditions for which you are prescribed even more drugs. In the meantime you continue eating the food that initially produced your chronic illness or got you sick in the first place.

This sad and dark scenario is a win/lose proposition. The health care, pharmaceutical and food industries win, and you lose.

You have to take charge of your own health. I guarantee that no one else will.

---

Dr. Oz Under Fire

I don't think there is a more well-known and famous doctor in America than Dr. Mehmet Oz -- Dr. Oz for short. His fame and popularity grew from his many appearances on the Ophrah Winfrey show.

Dr. Oz now has his very own show, and it is enormously popular. The show averages 3.7 million viewers a day. He also has a website.

Dr. Mehmet Oz is a respected cardiologist (heart specialist.) What makes him unique is that he doesn't confine his topics to heart health. He tackles nutrition as well as sex and child care. Dr. Oz's views are respected by millions of people all across America.

By and large, Dr. Oz doesn't buck the conventional medical paradigm. But lately he is seeing his share of critics. Dr. Oz believes Americans should be given all medical alternatives, and not just what traditional medicine validates.

Dr. Oz has invited doctors on his show who advocate alternative health solutions. These solutions or approaches are shunned by the established medical establishment.

For instance, he once had a doctor on his show who believed that baking soda can cure cancer. His website endorses a group which teaches 'unproven' autism treatments.

Dr. Oz refused to answer his critics according to an article published on the website chron.com. However his spokespersons say Dr. Oz's mission is to give his audience information from different perspectives -- not just from the entrenched medical establishment.

Whereas I was once critical of Dr. Oz for just merely advocating conventional medical practices, I now applaud his open mindedness. He is at least willing to look at alternative medical approaches. Showing all views allows people to make up their own minds. This is truly the democratic way. Allow all perspectives and let the people draw their own conclusions.

"The purpose of the [web]site is to provide users with as much information as possible and allow the users to differentiate between what they find helpful and what they do not," says Oz's spokespersons.

A good example of what is angering some medical critics concerns the rotavirus vaccine. In Oz's guild called YOU: Having a Baby, he and co-author express concern about whether rotavirus vaccines cause intussusception, a rare intestinal complication.

The guide suggest that parents "opt out of this one until more data are available -- unless your child is in daycare or other high-risk circumstances..."

I take my hat off to Dr. Oz and his co-author. Even though those vaccines are recommended by the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the World Health Organization, there may be, and frequently is, behind the scenes partnerships with pharmaceutical conglomerates. Money is a powerful motivator.

There is compelling evidence that the vaccination schedule for babies is too aggressive, and leads to negative health risks. Dr. Oz describes as 'reasonable' an alternate vaccine schedule which is in favor with many parents who believe that their children are given too many vaccines too fast.

Dr. Oz has even had Dr. Joseph Mercola, an alternative medicine practitioner, on his show (The Dr. Oz Show.) As you may be aware of, this site promotes Dr. Mercola's products and practices.

---

Early 20th Century Food in the 21st Century--Retro is Better

(Photo left: class picture was taken in 1960 or thereabouts; food technology then was superior to that of our 21st century.)

There is no question that technology has grown by leaps and bounds in the last 60 years. There were no cell phones, video games, iPods, internet, surround sound, cable or satellite TV, laptops or home computers of any kind in 1950.

The few computers that did exist were confined to research laboratories and were room-sized monstrosities with hundreds of vacuum tubes. Consumer televisions were in their infancy, and they were only black and white sets with screen sizes under 15 inches.

Although a few homes had television sets back then, most didn't. My father finally saved enough money to buy a set on which I remember watching Howdy Doody.

Not only was electronics technology in its infancy in 1950, but so was food technology. Factory farms, artificial sweeteners, monosodium glutamate, genetically modified organisms, cloning, and synthetic hormones did not exist back then. Neither did you have an obesity crisis, runaway cancer and heart disease, and men, women, and even infants with unnatural levels of toxic chemicals in their bodies.

Poultry and beef came from animals that grazed outdoors 60 years ago, and ate what God designed them to eat. And the meat then was not owned and raised by huge food conglomerates concerned only with their bottom line. And where consumer safety was at risk because their meat was given hormones to accelerate growth and milk production, and antibiotics to combat sickness caused by unsanitary and overcrowded conditions.

Whereas the independent family farm is almost nonexistent today, it flourished back then. Farmers used traditional methods to raise their animals. They worked hard and took pride in their work.

Unfortunately the path of food technology did not parallel the path of electronics technology. Scientific innovations were introduced to food production which placed human and animal health at risk due to unforeseen complications.

Normally time introduces better ways of doing things which does not harm us. Not so with food technology though. Electronics technology improved phenomenally and benefited mankind, food technology on the other hand produced food which compromises your health.

Of course food technologists, scientists, and manufacturers do not see food today as causing disease. They believe that unproven technologies such as cloning, genetically modified ingredients, and CAFO (concentrated animal feeding operation), also known as factory farming, is harmless.

The degenerating results of food technology has a cascading effect. It causes obesity and chronic disease. And chronic disease is not confined to adults either. It reaches the most vulnerable segments of our society--the unborn and infants.

All age groups are now facing health issues which were not even dreamed of 60 years ago. And what is America's solution to this medical nightmare which is unique to the late 20th century and extending into the 21st century? Pharmaceutical drugs and weight loss surgery.

Pharmaceutical drugs and weight loss surgery are not evil in and of themselves. But they become a danger because they are (1) often the first medical solution offered and (2) they do not address the root cause of the problem. They become mere band-aids covering the problem which is then allowed to remain.

Medications often have a list of devastating side effects which mushroom into other medical issues. These issues are then 'resolved' by prescribing yet more pharmaceuticals. America's medical paradigm is a win-lose situation. Pharmaceutical and food companies win and the consumer loses.

21st century medicine in America is all about profit. Obscene amounts of money are to be had in 'treating' disease with drugs and weight loss surgery. It is a vicious circle in which the food industry provides a lifetime patient for the health industry. In the meantime sick patients continue eating processed and technology-driven food which perpetuates their illness and guarantees they will never get well.

Radio and television in the 1950s were free of pharmaceutical drug advertising. The only 'drug' commercial I remember seeing in those early years was Bufferin for headaches. And then there was Speedy for the Alka-Seltzer commercials. But that was it.

But a headache is a legitimate symptom. Today the pharmaceutical industry is guilty of disease mongering, manufacturing diseases for which they provide drugs to treat.

Not everything advertised in those early days was good--I'm not saying that. Cigarette smoking was responsible for millions of cancer cases and eventual death--including that of my baby sister.

Although cigarette smoking is now recognized for the danger it poses and has been pulled from the airwaves, it has been replaced by foods and technologies now viewed as harmless. And this is without long-term studies proving their safety.

Today you will not view one commercial-driven program on network television without seeing an advertisement for drugs for insomnia, restless leg syndrome, cholesterol, depression, and diabetes. Or weight loss programs for America's 67 percent overweight population.

Neither will you see commercials encouraging viewers, or listeners in the case of radios, to eat vegetables or grass-fed or free-ranged meat. Do you remember the Green Giant commercials for vegetables?

Family eating practices were different 60 years ago too. For the most part, breakfast and dinner were eaten at home. The only exception was lunch. As a small child I can remember seeing high school students drinking sodas and eating sandwiches bought from the corner delicatessen. (We lived within sight of Lincoln High School in Jersey City.)

But other students either brought their lunches to school or did as I did--went home to eat.

I must add however that even the sandwiches from the corner delicatessen then were healthier than the food that is puchased from today's fast food restaurants. There were no concerns about trans fats, meat from sick farm animals, artificial sweeteners, and genetically modified ingredients.

Students and those in the work force who brought their lunches from home did so in brown paper bags. Remember those? There weren't plastic bags back then. And sandwiches were wrapped in waxed paper, not aluminum foil. This is the era which we get the term brown-bagging it from. It means to bring meals from home.

Today you will find a McDonalds, Burger King, White Castle, Quick Check, Wendy's, and dozens of other fast food restaurants and food marts inundating our communities. They virtually did not exist in the 50s.

Although the 50s had its share of fast food eateries, they were few and far between. And many such as Wendy's and Taco Bell did not even exist.

In addition to the glut of fast food restaurants, there are thousands of upscale ethnic eateries. More Americans eat outside the home than in any other period of history. Eat-at-home families are rare today.

Just as there were far fewer fast food restaurants 60 years ago, there were fewer upscale restaurants too. And the culture then was such that for a family to eat outside the home was a treat rather than an everyday event. Our family never did.

My father worked as a dental laboratory messenger in the early 60s. He would take me and maybe another one of my brothers to help him. My father would drive to the dentists in various cities and we would run up and down the stairs to make deliveries to the dentists.

Instead of eating breakfast at home, sometimes my father would stop for hamburgers at White Castle. But we would always bring lunch from home. This was as much an economic issue as it was anything else.

Meals prepared at home are inherently healthier than those purchased outside the home whether 60 years ago or today. The consumer does not have access to monosodium glutamate, trans fats, or high fructose corn syrup--chemicals which are health-threatening.

Meals prepared 60 years ago were cooked on a stove or in an oven. The microwave oven was not on the market then. We now know that it changes the molecular structure of food. Microwaved food can cause disease as serious as cancer to develop.

There is now a growing movement to bring the state of food back to its healthy origins. This movement is being driven by programs aired on public television such as PBS (Public Broadcasting System) and alternative lifestyle websites such as this one.

In the case of food, retro is better. The 21st century continues to market products masquerading as food. This is all in the name of convenience and progress.

We can't recapture all of the quality food that was available 60 years ago however. For instance the soil then contained far more nutrients than it does today. That means the vitamin/mineral content of fruits and vegetables is not as high.

We can though buy locally and organically-grown produce, and meat from animals that are free-grazed. This will eliminate ingesting toxic pesticides and herbicides. And eating animals that are free-grazed means not consuming hormones and antibiotics from sick animals.

Studies have shown that organic produce contain higher levels of nutrients than nonorganic produce. Animals that are free-grazed have lower levels of saturated fat and a greater content of good fat like CLA (conjugated linoleic acid).

Going retro also requires buying basic food items and not pre-packaged meals. It means preparing meals from scratch like my mother did in the 50s and 60s. We didn't have instant this and instant that. We had real oatmeal and real potatoes. We didn't have pre-made biscuits which were simply heated in an oven or microwave. My mother made biscuits from flour, eggs, and milk. I'm talking about real food.

We were not afraid to eat plenty of butter and eggs 60 years ago. Neither did we shun red meat. Today doctors and food scientists caution people to eliminate these foods altogether, or eat them sparingly.

We now know that eggs are not the cholesterol trap that medical experts said they were. Butter will not clog your arteries putting you at risk for heart disease. And red meat, as long as it comes from free-grazed and organically raised animals, is completely healthy and safe.

I admit that I wouldn't want to have to do without the internet, computers, and surround sound. But I can do without what passes for food today. As far as nutrition, my health, and longevity is concerned--retro is better.

Return to Health Editorial Page 1