Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Diet’

© 2009 Nancy Appleton PhD and G.N. Jacobs

www.nancyappleton.com

We are always asked about sweeteners since we really don’t like sugar. Our answer is always we give limited support to Stevia and nothing else. We tell people who are healthy and still can walk away from the hot fudge sundae that Stevia is much better for you than sugar, fructose, high fructose corn syrup and the whole list of sugar alcohols and products of “Better Living Through Chemistry” that appear as multicolored packets on the restaurant table. We tell sick or addicted people to break the active phase of their sugar addiction and heal awhile before switching to Stevia.

Stevia, a plant-extract originally from Central and South America has been used as a sweetener for several centuries. It has been described alternately as either 30 or 300 times as sweet as sugar. Stevia has slowly gained popularity as an alternative to sugar, even though it wasn’t marketed, until recently, in the U.S. as a sweetener, but a dietary supplement. We can thank the FDA for this bit of Orwellian Newspeak. A food or drug is either safe or it is not.

As of September 2009, the Food and Drug Administration has given support to two Stevia products, Truvia and Purevia, for use as a sweetener in sodas and other drinks. Approval of Stevia as a food sweetener is still pending, but once the camel’s nose is in the tent things will happen automatically. What changed for a government organization that used a 1985 study that described Stevia as a mutagenic agent in the liver (possibly carcinogenic)?

Apparently, Coca-Cola and other large manufacturers of drinks and sodas have twisted some arms of the regulators, because as more people grasp Sugar Bad, Stevia Good Big Soda needs to give the people soda that appears healthy to keep up sales. Trust a corporation to turn something potentially helpful in moderation into something you still shouldn’t consume.

We will point to the “Hard Facts About Soft Drinks” chapter in our latest book, Suicide by Sugar to inform the reader that no soda is safe to drink. The primary culprit after sugar: phosphoric acid. Putting that much phosphorus into your body does as much damage to the Calcium-Phosphorus ratio as we have always said from the beginning of Dr. Appleton’s career. We also described phosphoric acid as an industrial solvent possibly able to clean toilets and kill insects.

Once the soda and juice manufacturers get their products into the marketplace, eventually Truvia will also be stuffed into the rainbow of packets on the table at our favorite eateries. Presently, that rainbow includes White (sugar or sucrose), Blue (aspartame), Pink (saccharin) and Yellow (sucralose). For purely, aesthetic reasons may we suggest Green for Truvia?

However, we will caution readers against these packs because we suspect that the Stevia in the Truvia packs will be mixed with dextrose or maltodextrin as the first ingredient (largest amount) in each pack as is the case with the other colors in the bin. These are sugar derivatives that will adulterate whatever is good and useful about Stevia. Mixing good things with bad things only ruins the food value of the beneficial as we have said many times explaining why many people are allergic to wheat due to a lifetime association with sugar.

So what is so good about Stevia that we actually are cautiously optimistic about the eventual release of small bags of pure Stevia powder in the supermarket for use in baking, coffee, grapefruit and lemonade? Well, despite the ignominious beginning to Stevia as a sweetener, a study that had been described as being “able to classify distilled water as a mutagen” enough people have used the product that there are health studies that show benefits for many diseases.

A study published in 2000 gave stevioside (Stevia’s active ingredient) to 60 hypertension patients with a placebo group of 49. Results described as significant for reducing blood pressure supplemented similar animal studies.[i]

Stevia’s reputed limited effect on blood glucose naturally led to diabetes studies. A Denmark study took blood glucose readings from 12 type-2 diabetes patients before eating Stevia or cornstarch with their meals and a couple hours later. The Stevia group showed blood glucose levels at least 18-percent less than the starch group, leading to the possibility that diabetes patients have finally found the sweetener that will allow them to have their sweet cake and eat it too.[ii]

But, after the FDA has spent many years trying to keep Stevia out of the U.S. marketplace, we should ask if there are any side effects. A study conducted by the Burdock Group generally supports the safety of Stevia, finding no adverse effects in rats at the massive doses such studies use to determine carcinogenic or mutagen properties of foods.[iii]

And so we give Stevia qualified support because while almost no information has surfaced to say that this sweetener hurts people, we realize that the weak link in any health plan is the patient him or herself. Many of us are unlikely to moderate our consumption of Stevia because so far we just have to have ice cream, chocolate cake or soda. Too much of a good thing isn’t good. But, on the range of things that are sweet but not named sugar, Stevia is a great start.

 

 


[i] Chan, P, et al “A Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Study of the Effectiveness and Tolerability of Oral Stevioside in Human Hypertension” Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2000 September; 50(3): 215–220. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2125.2000.00260.x

[ii] Gregersen S, et al. “Antihyperglycemic Effects of  Stevioside in Type-2 Diabetic Subjects.” Metabolism 2004 Jan;53(1):73-76

[iii] Williams LD, Burdock GA “Genotoxicity Studies on a High-Purity Rebauside A Preparation.” Food Chem Toxicol. 2009 Aug;47(8):1831-1836

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

© 2009 Nancy Appleton PhD and G.N. Jacobs

www.nancyappleton.com

Dr. Appleton has spent more than 35 years writing, lecturing and preaching, for a lack of a better word, this simple thought: our modern diet does more to harm us than bullets, car wrecks, falling from high places and possibly those scary viruses with names like Ebola Zaire combined will ever do. Mainstream medical opinion has not always been positive during that time. When she brought in Mr. Jacobs to manage the day to day aspects of her business, she admitted to being tired and despaired of why she couldn’t continue like one of her role models, Coco Chanel who ran her fashion and perfume empire well into her eighties.

“Coco Chanel was never beaten up by the medical establishment for thirty years,” Mr. Jacobs replied.

And now perhaps the wheel has turned. People begin to listen and we are still here spreading the word. The latest support comes from the backers of a new bill before the California Legislature concerning medical choices and informed consent. Assembly Bill 1478 is intended to provide accurate information about the risks and benefits to cardiac and diabetes patients in the State of California. The logic says that if people become aware that traditional therapies aren’t nearly as effective as diet, exercise and other lifestyle changes then people will opt out and try something with more hope of working. But, the patient needs to be informed.

Statistics cited by the bill’s backers are quite frightening:

  • Approximately, 44,800 bypass surgeries are performed per year in California.
  • Up to 5-percent die.
  • Nearly 80-percent experience cognitive difficulties afterwards.
  • Repeat bypass surgeries increase the fatal risk to between 15 and 20-percent.
  • Nearly 131,400 angioplasties performed every year with a 25-percent failure rate.
  • Costs to California: $48.36 billion per year or which $8.22 billion is paid directly by Medi-Cal.
  • Two million Californians have diabetes.
  • Diabetes costs California $36 billion per year of which $6.12 billon is paid by Medi-Cal.

The Authors of the bill listed Dr. Appleton’s book Lick the Sugar Habit as a primary “Must Read” sourcebook. But, perhaps the backers aren’t as aware of our continuing work in the nutrition field as we know more now.

We suspect that part of the problem is the medical approach of most doctors who have based much of their work on Louis Pasteur’s Germ Theories. In essence, doctors seek to whack disease with medicine instead of rooting out the causes. Dr. Appleton’s PhD thesis has been published, alternately titled The Curse of Louis Pasteur or Rethinking Pasteur’s Germ Theory.

The work continues in such works as Stopping Inflammation and Suicide by Sugar where further information about sugar and the related problem of inflammation are discussed in more detail. In Suicide by Sugar, the doctor discusses soft drinks and many other sugar-added drinks in detail. It may open your eyes.

Why is it important to include health choice and informed consent laws as part of the total healthcare plan for the country? Consider Congressman Mike Roger’s harsh comments on the cost of healthcare and healthcare reform.[i] While we won’t comment here about the Congressman’s apparent lack of concern for people who can’t pay for their own insurance, he does seem to understand that healthcare costs a lot of money.

Our position and that of the backers of AB 1478 is that prevention over allopathic intervention with drugs and surgery must be considered a viable treatment plan as part of overall healthcare reform. It will certainly reduce the costs of treatment and may make public option health insurance or whatever improvements come out of the political process cheaper to implement.

A home cooked meal of two hamburger patties, mashed potatoes, grilled onions and a salad compared to the same building block foods prepared differently and consumed at McDonalds probably represents at least 300-percent price differential in cost per meal. So does the price break at the register also represent a break when it comes to calculating healthcare costs? Dr. Appleton’s work certainly has always said so, but let’s hear from the supporters of AB 1478 and the position papers they used to justify this legislation.

Dr. Pamela Poppe, one of the experts tasked to defend AB 1478, presents many examples of the comparative ineffectiveness of many traditional treatments for many common diseases. A long-running study conducted by Dr. Caldwell Esselstyn started with 24 patients in 1983, of which 18 were still on the program of a healthier diet in 2000, showed that the patients still on the program had no new cardiac events, while the six that left the program had 11, including one death.[ii]

Dr. Poppe continues to list examples for almost all of the main diseases that kill us and in many cases the results of the dietary approach are vastly superior to the drug and surgery approach. A 35-year study on multiple sclerosis patients found that over the time of the study a low-saturated fat diet prevented the disease progression to the tune of a 95-percent success rate.[iii] The traditional therapy shows that half of all patients are dead, in wheelchairs, or using walkers.[iv] Something is wrong.

These facts are but a small sample of how modern medicine hurts us more than helps us. We encourage you to venture to www.camedicalchoice.com for more information on health and the fight to include heart disease, diabetes and other diseases on the long list of things your doctor must tell you before starting treatment.


[i] http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=G44NCvNDLfc

 

[ii] Esselstyn, CB Jr. “Updating a 12-year Experience With Arrest and Reversal Therapy for Coronary Heart Disease (An Overdue Requiem for Palliative Cardiology)” The Am J of Cardiology 1999 August 1; 84:339-341

[iii] Swank, RL, Dugan BB “Effect of Low Saturated Fat Diet in Early and Late Cases of Multiple Sclerosis” Lancet 1990;336:37-39

[iv] Munari, L, et al. “Therapy With Glatiramer Acetate for Multiple Sclerosis.” Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004 (1):CD004678

Read Full Post »

© 2009 Nancy Appleton PhD and G.N. Jacobs

Authors of Suicide by Sugar

www.nancyappleton.com

https://nancyappletonbooks.wordpress.com

Perhaps, you’ve already read one of the many variations of recent statements on sugar from The American Heart Association? We at Nancy Appleton Books are very happy, so much so that we’ll take a moment to do the Snoopy Dance. On second thought, the dance looks stupid when real people do it.

So, what does the American Heart Association’s instructions that everyone should cut their added sugar intake by 70-percent mean beyond giving Doctor Appleton a moment where she gets to say I told you so sometime back in 1986? Well, that depends on your circumstances, because we think the Heart Association has picked a sugar threshold that is still well above what is best for optimal health, but also represents a vast improvement over how things are done now.

Data collected between 2001 and 2004 and cited in the statement put the average American’s sugar consumption at 22 teaspoons or 355 extra calories of sugar per day. Citing recent studies that generally link sugar to obesity, diabetes and heart disease, the association has decided that men on 2,200-calorie diets should cut their sugar intake to 9 teaspoons or 150 calories per day. Woman in similar actuarial brackets assumed to eat 1,800 calories per day are instructed to cut down to 6 teaspoons or 100 calories per day.

Just so you know, while these “official” recommendations may not be enough for some people to lose weight and become healthier, they do represent threats to the major producers of sugar in our modern diet. A soda manufacturer, for instance, will worry because the average cola tips the scale at 8-10 teaspoons or 130-150 calories. The heart association published statistics that break down our sugar usage to regular soda (33%), sugars and candy (16.1%), cakes, cookies and pie (12.9%), fruit drinks (9.7%), dairy desserts and milk products (8.6%) and other grain-based treats (5.8%).

Even with other categories of foods that deliver sugar to an unsuspecting populace not discussed in this breakdown, a reduction to 9 and 6 teaspoons respectively means many sugar producers may change their business model. We’ll discuss what the heart association left out in a later paragraph.

In her first book Lick the Sugar Habit, Dr. Appleton states that the human body needs only about 2 teaspoons of blood sugar (glucose) per day. Normal consumption of whole fruits, vegetables and grains will provide this amount of glucose without resort to any added sugar at all![i] So you see, 6 or 9 teaspoons of sugar versus 2 teaspoons still means that the heart association people have quite a ways to go before they get our full support.

We also have reason to wonder if the statement writers have based their sugar consumption numbers on statistics that underreport the real story. Statistics on sugar vary between reports depending on who is doing the test and how close they are to the U.S. Government, which until very recently thought nothing was wrong with sugar if you brushed your teeth. In 1989, the Berkley Wellness letter, estimated that sugar consumption in 1985 to be 133 pounds per year or 500 to 600 calories per day per person.[ii] We are already well above the numbers cited by the heart association statement written nearly twenty years later. We have in the years since raised yearly sugar consumption to well over 150 pounds per person per year.

One thing that we can completely agree on with the American Heart Association is the high degree to which soda delivers the most sugar to the most people. Their information says that soda represents a third of all sugar injected into the average diet. Our information may not exactly agree, but still says that we get too much sugar from soft drinks, lemonade, punch and whatever Tang is defined as. We devoted a whole chapter of Suicide by Sugar to soft drinks and other similar sugary drinks.

In 2005, the average American was estimated to drink 35.5 gallons of just regular soda, which when the other categories of sugary drinks are added in comes out to the equivalent of 637 cans of soda per person per year.[iii] We cited a statement from the American Academy of Pediatrics made in 2004 that said that all members should advocate for the removal of all sugary drinks from schools. The primary reason was to prevent obesity in children and to make sure that sugar didn’t replace healthy nutrients in children’s diets.[iv]

The Heart Association has come out for sugar reductions and we applaud. But, we find it interesting that the bulk of the recommendations fall against the easy culprits in our sweet diets: soda, ice cream, cake, pie, but not some others that may in the long run be more useful. We understand about birthday parties and the social reasons we eat sugar, even though we assume many people will act like addicts and lose the ability to say “no more today.” But, shouldn’t sugar reductions fall against all sugar producers equally?

As of this writing, Mr. Jacobs holds a Heinz ketchup bottle in his hands with this ingredient list: tomato concentrate, distilled vinegar, HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP, CORN SYRUP, salt, spice, onion powder, natural flavoring. He also pulled out a can of his generic brand chili where SUGAR and MODFIED CORN STARCH are listed together about in the middle of the list. So far, there is no call on the part of the Heart Association to question the sugar that is in regular processed food that doesn’t need to be there from the point of view of taste.

Mr. Jacobs admits to making compromises with some sugar-laden foods for convenience. He refuses to boil beans and simmer down meat and spices to make his own chili, a recipe that he was never taught, because he already spends too much time in the kitchen some days. He is trying to wean himself off of ketchup as a base for marinara sauce in favor of steamed tomatoes. He reports mixed results. But, these foods aren’t supposed to taste sweet; yet, we see sugar in all of its many names on the labels.

We would suggest to the Heart Association to take a look at the sugar in these processed foods and see if advocating for cans of chili without sugar added would help reduce sugar consumption without being so draconian about the obvious sugar sources. Yes, in a perfect world whole fruit with a tiny bit of cream for the lactose tolerant would replace the fudge sundae, but the short term comfort of these foods is very powerful.

Instead of denying the occasional fall off the wagon doesn’t it make more sense to start with foods that the sugar taste is practically overwhelmed by all the other spices as to be tasteless? Sugar is not a preservative and canned meat is vacuum-sealed, so preservation isn’t the reason for this practice. We hope it isn’t because sugar is addictive, another of our common rants.

Sugar upsets body chemistry and helps cause heart disease, diabetes, obesity and many other maladies. Doctor Appleton has said this for more than 30 years and we feel good that other health groups are now catching on. It is a good day.

www.nancyappleton.com

https://nancyappletonbooks.wordpress.com


[i] Appleton, N. Lick the Sugar Habit. (New York: Avery Penguin Putnam, 1988) Pg 13.

[ii] University of California, Berkley Wellness Letter 6, No. 3 December 1989, pp 4-5

[iii] U.S. Department of Agriculture “Food Availabilty: Custom Queries.” www.ers.usda.gov/Data/FoodConsumption/FoodAvailQueriable.aspx

[iv] Taras, H.L., et al. “Policy Statement” Pediatrics. Jan 2004; 113; 1: 152-154.

Read Full Post »

Nancy Appleton PhD and G.N. Jacobs

© 2009 Nancy Appleton Books

www.nancyappleton.com

https://nancyappletonbooks.wordpress.com

How many times did your mother tell you to eat up because kids living in a place you weren’t going to visit anyway were starving? How many times did you respond saying “why don’t you send this plate to Ethiopia?” Believe it or not, the child’s wish to not eat is sometimes more nutritionally appropriate than the mother’s position.

According to the results of a long-term rhesus monkey study from Wisconsin, modest reductions in daily calories can help primates live longer and healthier than on the normal diet. Over twenty years, the monkeys were divided into normal and reduced calorie diet groups. Apparently, 37-percent of the monkeys in the regular group had died of age-related conditions as opposed to 13-percent of the dieting group at the end of the study.

The researchers reduced the dieting monkeys’ calorie intake by 30-percent, but took steps to make sure that all necessary nutrients were still consumed. The calorie-cut monkeys didn’t just live longer they had approximately half the heart disease and cancerous tumors of the non-dieting group. Additionally, the rates of diabetes and brain atrophy, conditions associated with aging, were greatly reduced in the dieting group.[i]

We at Nancy Appleton Books applaud this research with both cheers and a “we told you so.” We have commented on food intake and other aspects of our diet making us fat, especially in our recent book Suicide by Sugar.

A sedentary lifestyle that goes from bed to work in front of a screen to entertainment in front of another screen and back to bed leads to lack of exercise, overeating and eating processed foods. The processed foods are high in sugars, especially fructose. Fructose has a way of making people feel still hungry[ii], which feeds a vicious cycle of eating more and more making people fat and unhealthy. Our position has always been to cut back on sugar and preservatives in favor of whole foods, which represents the kind of caloric reductions mentioned in the Wisconsin monkey study.

What the average person reading this article needs to know before applying a 30-percent daily calorie reduction to his or her life is what is in the monkey chow normally fed to the primates in captivity? Rhesus monkeys in the wild eat insects, fruit, worms, leaves and roots usually after exerting some energy to get the food. We have it directly from the Wisconsin researchers that the “animals ate a semi-purified, well-defined pelleted diet consisting of 15-percent protein (lactalbumin) 10-percent fat (corn oil) that also contains sucrose, corn starch, dextrin, cellulose and a vitamin and mineral mix. In addition each animal receives a piece of fresh fruit (~100 kcal) daily.”

At this point, we need to refer the reader to experiments conducted on cats by Francis Pottenger Jr. MD between 1932 and 1942 that show how the modern processed diet is in of itself a cause for alarm. Pottenger’s cats were given a diet of raw milk, cod liver and either raw meat or cooked meat. The cooked meat cats showed generations of abnormalities that left alone killed off the cat breeding after three generations and took four generations of a proper diet to heal in the cat offspring.[iii] While it is true that subsequent replication studies suggest a taurine deficiency more than cooking as the cause of the symptoms showed by Pottenger’s cats, which included heart disease, bad vision, lack of balance and wild variations in birth weight, there is some link between our diet and the symptoms we feel.[iv]

Pottenger’s cats apply to the monkey study in this way; the standard captive monkey diet already has a lot of fat, heart disease and other ailments built in. Making a 30-percent cut in this non-whole foods diet will help because a lot of sugar is being cut out and every little bit helps. More research is obviously needed to see if monkeys and humans would benefit as much from calorie reduction when they go on a diet of more whole foods than not, or if these primate studies just tell us to cut the sugar, excess carbohydrates, preservatives and other time bombs in our diet to achieve the same effect.

Another minor issue in applying the monkey study to our diet is the distressing fact that portion sizes in human meals keep increasing. Some food items, like chocolate chip cookies, increased 700-percent between 1982 and 2002.[v] We need to find out which year to use in setting an appropriate base meal size, because while any reduction from a high-calorie diet is an improvement it represents a false hope if the underlying average meal size continues to grow.

However, while there are holes left to fill concerning sugar and carbohydrates the first bit of research on overeating and longevity is in. Eating a little less without depriving yourself of nutrients will go a long way to extending your life and making you healthier. But, there are no magic pills for your health says Dr. David Finkelstein of the National Institute of Aging, a funding source for the Wisconsin study.

“Watch what you eat, keep your mind active, exercise and don’t get hit by a car,” Finkelstein says.

www.nancyappleton.com

https://nancyappletonbooks.wordpress.com


[i] Coleman, RJ, Et. Al. “Caloric Restriction Delays Disease Onset and Mortality in Rhesus Monkeys” Science 325;(5937): 201-204.

[ii] Tannous, dit El Khoury D. et. al. “Variations in Postprandial Ghrelin Status Following Ingestion of High-Carbohydrate, High-Fat and High-Protein Meals in Males.” Annals of Nutritional Metabolism. 50(3): 260-9 Feb 2006.

[iii] Pottenger, F. M. Jr.  Pottenger’s Cats (1983, Price Pottenger Nutrition Foundation, La Mesa CA.).

[iv] Beyond Vegetarianism.  “Lesson of the Pottenger’s Cats

Experiment: Cats are not Humans.”  http://www.beyondveg.com/tu-j-l/raw-cooked/raw-cooked-1h.shtml. Viewed  July 10, 2009.

[v] American Journal of Public Health. Feb 2002;92(2):247.

Read Full Post »

Sugar and Testosterone

Nancy Appleton PhD and G.N. Jacobs

Authors of Suicide by Sugar

© 2009 Nancy Appleton Books

www.nancyappleton.com

https://nancyappletonbooks.wordpress.com

Just say the words gonads, testosterone or any of the unprintable slang associated with testicles, sex and male virility and you’ll get a laugh or at least amused looks. Now, say those words again, but in a context that says, “you’re going to lose that capability, son” and watch what happens. The collective scream you hear is shrill enough to replace the air raid sirens America abandoned as stupid in the 1980s. Well, one way men lose that capability is to eat sugar.

New research so fresh that it hasn’t yet appeared in a journal article says flat out that eating sugar reduces testosterone levels in the blood by up to 25-percent across the board. The researchers found 74 men at Massachusetts General Hospital with a range of tolerances to glucose (42 normal blood sugar, 23 impaired glucose tolerance “prediabetic” and 9 actually with Type-2 Diabetes) and gave them 75g of a glucose solution. In many cases, the effect lasted at least 2 hours after ingestion and affected all types of men in the study. Of 66 men listed as having normal testosterone levels in a fasting state before the test 10 developed a hypogonadal (low testosterone) state at some point during the two hours of the test.[i]

The actual intent of the research funded by the National Institutes of Health and the American Diabetes Association was to refine testing methods for low testosterone levels. Current methodology says to test the man in the morning on two different days and get an average reading to see if the man is truly hypogondal or if the low testosterone will pick up later. So far, no one has said that a man should fast before taking the blood test, until now.

The link between sugar, insulin, obesity, diabetes, the metabolic syndrome and testosterone levels had been touched on in other research that has come out recently. Only these researchers worked backwards relative to this new study, they took people with known elements of the metabolic syndrome (diabetes, obesity and heart disease) and tested their testosterone levels. Many subjects had low testosterone.

In recent research conducted in Berlin, the conclusion read in part “Lower total testosterone and sex-hormone-binding-globulin (SHBG) predict a higher incidence of the metabolic syndrome…Administration of testosterone to hypogondal men reverses the unfavorable risk profile for the development of diabetes and atherosclerosis.”[ii]

In Finland where similar research is regularly conducted the researchers came up with this gem “Low total testosterone and SHBG levels independently predict development of the metabolic syndrome and diabetes in middle-aged men. Thus, hypoandrogenism (hypogondal) is an early marker for disturbances in insulin and glucose metabolism that may progress to the metabolic syndrome or frank diabetes.”[iii]

It seems that these previous studies were waiting for someone else to have a The Emperor Seems Naked moment and try out the inverse of their results in which you give sugar to mostly healthy people and see what happens. No longer should low testosterone be considered just a symptom of the metabolic syndrome, but as what both are…a result of too much sugar in our diet.

We at Nancy Appleton Books have already touched on sugar causing the metabolic syndrome in previous articles like 140 Reasons Why Sugar Ruins Your Health (https://nancyappletonbooks.wordpress.com/2009/05/23/140-reasons-sugar-ruins-your-health/). In it we make simple declarative statements about many of sugar’s ill effects.

  • Sugar can increase fasting levels of glucose.[iv]
  • Sugar can cause hypoglycemia.[v]
  • Sugar can lead to obesity.[vi]
  • Sugar can cause heart disease.[vii]
  • Sugar can cause metabolic syndrome.[viii]

One method how sugar lowers testosterone is its effect on the adrenal glands. Sugar taxes the adrenal glands and these glands interrelate with the sex hormone glands (testes and ovaries) that produce testosterone and estrogen.[ix]

These ailments listed above are elements of and highly associated with the metabolic syndrome, which we have linked to the excessive intake of sugar. The research in Massachusetts says that sugar causes low testosterone. Similar research around the world says that low testosterone is highly associated with the various elements of the metabolic syndrome. So how many times do we have to enjoy the circular logic before we simply say that sugar causes both the low testosterone and the ailments in the metabolic syndrome? Put more simply, sugar kills in a multitude of ways and this one affects men where they really live, in the bedroom.

www.nancyappleton.com

https://nancyappletonbooks.wordpress.com


[i] http://www.endo-society.org/media/press/upload/CARONIA_FINAL.pdf dated June 13, 2009

[ii] Saad F and Gooren L. “The Role of Testosterone in the Metabolic Syndrome: a Review” J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol Mar 2009:114(1-2):40-3

[iii] Laaksonen D.E. et al. “Testosterone and Sex Hormone-Binding Globulin Predict the Metabolic Syndrome in Middle-Aged Men” Diabetes Care May 2004;27(5):1036-41

[iv] . Kelsay, L et al. “Diets High in Glucose or Sucrose and Young Women.” Am J Clin Nutr. 1974; 27: 926-936.

Thomas, B. L et al. “Relation of Habitual Diet to Fasting Plasma Insulin Concentration and the Insulin Response to Oral Glucose.” Hum Nutr Clin Nutr. 1983; 36C(1): 49-51.

[v] Dufty, William. Sugar Blues. (New York: Warner Books, 1975).

[vi] Keen, H., et al. “Nutrient Intake, Adiposity and Diabetes.” Brit Med J. 1989; 1: 655-658.

[vii] Yudkin, J. “Sugar Consumption and Myocardial Infarction.” Lancet. Feb 6, 1971; 1(7693): 296-297.

Chess, D.J., et al. “Deleterious Effects of Sugar and Protective Effects of Starch on Cardiac Remodeling, Contractile Dysfunction, and Mortality in Response to Pressure Overload.” Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. Sep 2007; 293(3): H1853-H1860.

[viii] Yoo, Sunmi, et al. “Comparison of Dietary Intakes Associated with Metabolic Syndrome Risk Factors in Young Adults: the Bogalusa Heart Study.” Am J Clin Nutr. Oct 2004; 80(4): 841-848.

[ix] Lechin, F., et al. “Effects of an Oral Glucose Load on Plasma Neurotransmitters in Humans.” Neurophychobiology. 1992;26(1-2):4-11.

Read Full Post »

© 2008 Nancy Appleton PhD and G.N. Jacobs

www.nancyappleton.com

 

            We get asked about every new sweetener put out by the purveyors of unhealthy sweetness and agave nectar or syrup is the most recent. Put a gun to our heads and we’ll tell you not to eat it. Actually, we’ll do that without the pistol and dramatics, we’re quite consistent that way.

            Our basic position is always in favor of whole foods, because when a food processor converts a naturally sugary food like an apple or generous hunk of agave cactus into a syrup or nectar everything good about the whole food is lost in the production vat. Whole foods have fiber, vitamins and nutrients that enrich the body and in some cases slow down the sugar hit to the body that comes from glucose and fructose. So when a food distributor converts this semi-solid goodness into liquid sweetness, you are loading the revolver for a game of Russian roulette.

            In the specific case of agave, the debate comes down to whether glucose or fructose is more harmful to the body. Natural agave, the plant from which tequila is derived, is approximately half and half glucose to fructose. The nectar or syrup appears to be primarily all fructose according to published statistics from agave distributors.

            Now is fructose better for you than glucose or sucrose? If you listen to the fructose manufacturers and some diabetes experts, then yes fructose is better for you. Fructose doesn’t raise glucose levels in the bloodstream, which means that there is less of an insulin response and a consequent benefit to diabetics because insulin management is the name of the game.

            But, is spiking up on fructose any better for anyone whether diabetic or not? Doctor Appleton and others say No! Fructose has been linked to raised triglycerides, more belly fat and contributes to fatty liver disease, diabetes, heart disease and hypertension, which can all be collected together as Metabolic Syndrome. Doctor Appleton has included these views on fructose in her upcoming book Suicide by Sugar.

            Agave seems to have other drawbacks related to its fructose content, but that require comment separately from the basic fructose debate. The first one that sets our teeth on edge is the thought that agave nectar might not actually be agave nectar.

            According to reporting by the Chicago Tribune, products labeled as being from the blue agave plant may in fact be mostly corn syrup or high-fructose corn syrup. Tequila manufacturers get first call on the expensive blue agave cactus that grows in Mexico. There are strict requirements for tequila to come from the blue agave in the same way the German Beer Purity Law says beer is wheat or barley, hops, water and fermenting yeast. So the nectar producers have a demand for agave that can’t be met by supply and decide to cut what agave they have with similar corn-based fructose.

            “Agave is really chemically refined hydrolyzed high-fructose syrup and not from the blue agave plant, organic or raw, as claimed,” says Russ Bianchi, a food and beverage formulator.

            So far the Food and Drug Administration sees no reason to regulate agave for any safety concerns, but admits that agave products may have been “economically adulterated and misbranded by adding corn syrup or high-fructose corn syrup.”

            The Chicago Tribune also reports some less well-documented effects of agave nectar consumption that may be a concern. Apparently, some agave products and other sweeteners may have botulism spores and thus shouldn’t be given to small children. There are assertions that agave may cause miscarriages and/or other harm to pregnant or lactating mothers and agave, like many other sugary products, has also been linked to increased acne.

            Agave does have some possible health benefits touted by its proponents. As stated, glucose levels aren’t raised. Agave is loaded with inulin, a complex sub-variant of fructose, which is broken down by friendly bacteria to make fatty acids that may fight colon cancer. Additionally, agave may have some anti-inflammatory and anti-cancer properties. But, these effects are hotly debated.

            “It’s almost all fructose, highly processed sugar with great marketing,” says Dr. Ingrid Kohlstadt of the American College of Nutrition and the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health. “Fructose interferes with healthy metabolism when taken at higher doses. Many people have fructose intolerance like lactose intolerance. They get acne or worse diabetes symptoms even though blood glucose is OK.”

            Even some agave proponents like Dave Grotto, a Registered Dietician and author of 101 Foods that Could Save Your Life, will admit that “excess consumption of any sweetener is not wise. But, honey and agave are value-added sweeteners, if used moderately.”

            If the best the pro-agave people can come up with for their product is use in moderation, then that should really be read as avoid as much as possible. Doctor Appleton has also written some information about sugar addiction in Sweet Suicide and her earlier work Lick the Sugar Habit. If sugar, fructose, honey, agave, stevia and other sweeteners can lead to addiction, then how is the average person to know what in moderation actually means? How much is too much before a small dose of agave that may help with cancer and inflammation becomes a mainline hit of fructose to the bloodstream and liver?

            Doctor Appleton’s answer is usually less than 2 teaspoons a day for any refined sweetener to avoid the many related health effects. We live in the same world you do and we understand about occasionally unavoidable and falling off the wagon, but any sweetener removed from its natural state is a refined sweetener that should be avoided as much as possible. Agave is no different. Now you know.

 

SOURCES

http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/chi-0323deardorffmar23,1,7478086.story

Suicide by Sugar Nancy Appleton PhD 2008 Square One Publishers

Lick the Sugar Habit Nancy Appleton PhD 1996 Avery

Read Full Post »

 

Allergies and Disease
Your sugar addiction, allergies and other symptoms are probably why you’re visiting this site. Dr. Appleton’s position is that allergies, degenerative and infectious diseases are related in their causes, a supressed immune system. In the course, of her work she discovered that such immune system suppressions can occur with many of the foods that are ubiquitous in our modern diet, of which the chief culprit is sugar. She also found out that stress allowed to fester into distress has similar effects on our health.
For many people, eating any foods that are normally good for you with an abusive food like sugar may eventually cause you to be allergic to that food. The doctor tells a story of her unhealthy youth where she would pop into a hamburger stand and get onion rings with a chocolate shake. Until she started applying the principles of homeostasis and mineral balance to her own life, she couldn’t have told you why even raw onions made her nose run, her joints ache and key parts of her body swelled up. The sugar in the chocolate shake and the fried fat of the onion rings were such an assault on her immune system that her body classified onions as a foreign invader thus creating a food allergy.
Some people get heart attacks. Some people can drink cow’s milk (not many). Some people get diabetes. Some people get cancer. Some people smoke cigars every day until they’re 90. Your genetic makeup plays a role in the way you’ll get sick if you abuse your body, but your lifestyle largely determines if you’ll get sick. This is one of the reasons why we don’t want to hear about your symptoms (see FAQ) and only give general advice, because you’re all too different from everyone else.
Usually, the allergies you get are precursors and warnings for more serious conditions that you get later in life. Eating foods from the list of commonly abused foods (See below and/or food plans in book) makes your gastro-intestinal tract permeable (leaky) so that not all of the food digests and these particles enter the bloodstream (Yes, there are medical journal citations for this statement in all of the doctor’s books). The immune system reacts and and sends out white blood cells and antibodies to deal with the threat, because food particles are not supposed to be in the bloodstream.
However, when the immune system is dealing with your food this way, what it is not doing is killing off all the things for which you really need your immune system: the new flu strain, the cells that freak out and become cancerous, that nasty Candida Albacans problem, or the fact that you didn’t wash out your cuts. All of the immune system’ energy is taken up with the donuts, 4 cokes/day, your lack of exercise and that chocolate cake.
Abusive foods get you with a double whammy, because in addition to the process noted above they change the mineral relationships in your body. Minerals may be present, but they won’t work unless the correct amount of supporting minerals are also present. Every process in your body is governed by your hormones and enzymes which are all mineral dependent and so your body doesn’t work as well. So perhaps you needed selenium to work its magic upon the serotonin in your nerve cells so you can think clearly through that final exam, but you drank some soda and now you lost some copper which helps selenium? This example may not be accurate (see wheel below), but it illustrates that your body will break down over time if minerals and other nutrients are not in balance (this is homeostasis a word coined by Walter B. Cannon). The digestive and immune systems are usually the first to feel the effects of this imbalance rendering your body unable to process food or fight off foreign invaders. Allergies and disease follow. Dr. Appleton says, “Put your body in homeostasis and your body will heal itself.”
Now, many doctors don’t think that adults get allergies, because doctors don’t see symptoms. However, testing with the Body Monitor Test Kit shows excess calcium secreted into the urine when people eat foods to which they react. Blood tests for the various immunoglobulins (markers for immune responses) have also shown reactions when the patient reports no symptoms.
Disease follows allergy because one immune weakness creates more. The allergan acts like sugar, stress or anything else to which you react. An allergy to milk may mean lots of undigested calcium that may show up as dental plaque, hardened arteries, or the lactose may spike your insulin response as if you had eaten regular sugar. What disease you’ll get depends on your genetic profile and your genes’ interaction with your bad diet or unrequited stress.
Most people are allergic to: sugar and most other sweeteners, caffeine, alcohol, wheat, dairy, chocolate, corn and anything that you eat with a lot of sugar or that you overcook. A person can be allergic to anything if they abuse it by eating it with sugar.
Some allergies are not permanent. Dr. Appleton reports that her allergy to onions finally went away after several years of keeping it out of her diet and ceasing the sugar. However, even after 30 years she still can’t eat chocolate, beef, chicken, eggs, cheese or any other dairy, except butter on her potatoes.
The entire program is based on a regular testing regime for which you will need the Body Monitor and a diet in which you remove all harmful foods. The idea is that you remove these foods for a period of time and then gradually reintroduce them one at a time. Using the kit you will test your urine one hour after eating a suspect food. Seven drops each of both your urine and the reagent is enough for a single test. If you have a reaction then you are allergic to the tested food and you should keep it out of your diet. Cloudy means too much calcium excreted into the urine; this is bad. Clear urine means not enough calcium secreted; this is also bad. Slightly hazy is normal and is a good indicator of homeostasis. You’ll see results instantly when you hold the test tube up to any piece of paper with text on it. You should have a slight problem reading the text, any other result is a problem. Please refer to the instruction booklet or Lick the Sugar Habit for more information about urine and saliva testing.
In each of her books, Dr. Appleton has listed three food plans at the back. Food Plan Three is restrictive, but is designed to mimic the Paleolithic Diet of reasonable amounts of protein and lots of vegetables. Fruit is not part of Food Plan Three because it has enough sugar to keep an unhealthy person out of homeostasis. You have to heal before fruit can be reintroduced, so fruit is part of Food Plans Two and One. Regardless or which plan you choose, you have to modify the plans to keep whatever you’re allergic to out of your diet. Additionally, if you’re coming to this site having tried some other health information, none of the food plans conflict with anything else. Vegetarians/vegans can eat even from Food Plan Three if they realize the real problem is sugar, honey, molasses and other sweeteners and not animal proteins per se. Vegetarians can eat beans, whole grains and vegetables to get their protein. Also, the doctor says that those who eat according to their metabolic or blood type will also find plenty of food to eat on any of the food plans.
Stress management, exercise and the mental side of things are also important. Bad feelings also upset your body chemistry causing allergies and disease. Don’t eat if you feel stressed until you’ve meditated, prayed, exercised, written in the journal and so forth. Everyone gets stress, especially if there’s a freeway nearby. But, dealing with it properly helps keep you healthy. Don’t let stress become distress!
These concepts are basically the core of Dr. Appleton’s program. The idea is now that you have some information and start testing your own homeostasis you will figure out your own health program after consulting your doctor. Maybe you need to cut out the ice cream, those French fries or perhaps you eat too much of a good thing and should cut your plate size in half.
YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT YOU EAT, WHAT YOU SAY, HOW YOU FEEL AND HOW MUCH YOU MOVE YOUR BODY. Thus you are responsible for your health. Sickness doesn’t just happen no matter what the least knowledgeable doctors say. Now you have some information to take charge of your own health.
AC_FL_RunContent( ‘codebase’,’http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=5,0,0,0′,’width’,’100′,’height’,’22’,’src’,’button5′,’quality’,’high’,’pluginspage’,’http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/download.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash’,’bgcolor’,”,’movie’,’button5′ ); //end AC code
AC_FL_RunContent( ‘codebase’,’http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=5,0,0,0′,’width’,’100′,’height’,’22’,’src’,’button6′,’quality’,’high’,’pluginspage’,’http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/download.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash’,’movie’,’button6′ ); //end AC code
AC_FL_RunContent( ‘codebase’,’http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=5,0,0,0′,’width’,’100′,’height’,’22’,’src’,’button9′,’quality’,’high’,’pluginspage’,’http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/download.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash’,’movie’,’button9′ ); //end AC code
AC_FL_RunContent( ‘codebase’,’http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=5,0,0,0′,’width’,’100′,’height’,’22’,’src’,’button13′,’quality’,’high’,’pluginspage’,’http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/download.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash’,’bgcolor’,”,’movie’,’button13′ ); //end AC code
AC_FL_RunContent( ‘codebase’,’http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=5,0,0,0′,’width’,’100′,’height’,’22’,’src’,’button17′,’quality’,’high’,’pluginspage’,’http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/download.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash’,’bgcolor’,”,’movie’,’button17′ ); //end AC code
AC_FL_RunContent( ‘codebase’,’http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=5,0,0,0′,’width’,’100′,’height’,’22’,’src’,’button32′,’quality’,’high’,’pluginspage’,’http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/download.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash’,’movie’,’button32′ ); //end AC code
AC_FL_RunContent( ‘codebase’,’http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=5,0,0,0′,’width’,’100′,’height’,’22’,’src’,’button33′,’quality’,’high’,’pluginspage’,’http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/download.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash’,’movie’,’button33′ ); //end AC code
(c) 2007 G.N. Jacobs & Nancy Appleton
Used with permission
Your sugar addiction, allergies and other symptoms are probably why you’re visiting this site. Dr. Appleton’s position is that allergies, degenerative and infectious diseases are related in their causes, a supressed immune system. In the course, of her work she discovered that such immune system suppressions can occur with many of the foods that are ubiquitous in our modern diet, of which the chief culprit is sugar. She also found out that stress allowed to fester into distress has similar effects on our health.
For many people, eating any foods that are normally good for you with an abusive food like sugar may eventually cause you to be allergic to that food. The doctor tells a story of her unhealthy youth where she would pop into a hamburger stand and get onion rings with a chocolate shake. Until she started applying the principles of homeostasis and mineral balance to her own life, she couldn’t have told you why even raw onions made her nose run, her joints ache and key parts of her body swelled up. The sugar in the chocolate shake and the fried fat of the onion rings were such an assault on her immune system that her body classified onions as a foreign invader thus creating a food allergy.
Some people get heart attacks. Some people can drink cow’s milk (not many). Some people get diabetes. Some people get cancer. Some people smoke cigars every day until they’re 90. Your genetic makeup plays a role in the way you’ll get sick if you abuse your body, but your lifestyle largely determines if you’ll get sick. This is one of the reasons why we don’t want to hear about your symptoms (see FAQ) and only give general advice, because you’re all too different from everyone else.
Usually, the allergies you get are precursors and warnings for more serious conditions that you get later in life. Eating foods from the list of commonly abused foods (See below and/or food plans in book) makes your gastro-intestinal tract permeable (leaky) so that not all of the food digests and these particles enter the bloodstream (Yes, there are medical journal citations for this statement in all of the doctor’s books). The immune system reacts and and sends out white blood cells and antibodies to deal with the threat, because food particles are not supposed to be in the bloodstream.
However, when the immune system is dealing with your food this way, what it is not doing is killing off all the things for which you really need your immune system: the new flu strain, the cells that freak out and become cancerous, that nasty Candida Albacans problem, or the fact that you didn’t wash out your cuts. All of the immune system’ energy is taken up with the donuts, 4 cokes/day, your lack of exercise and that chocolate cake.
Abusive foods get you with a double whammy, because in addition to the process noted above they change the mineral relationships in your body. Minerals may be present, but they won’t work unless the correct amount of supporting minerals are also present. Every process in your body is governed by your hormones and enzymes which are all mineral dependent and so your body doesn’t work as well. So perhaps you needed selenium to work its magic upon the serotonin in your nerve cells so you can think clearly through that final exam, but you drank some soda and now you lost some copper which helps selenium? This example may not be accurate (see wheel below), but it illustrates that your body will break down over time if minerals and other nutrients are not in balance (this is homeostasis a word coined by Walter B. Cannon). The digestive and immune systems are usually the first to feel the effects of this imbalance rendering your body unable to process food or fight off foreign invaders. Allergies and disease follow. Dr. Appleton says, “Put your body in homeostasis and your body will heal itself.”
mineralwheel2
Now, many doctors don’t think that adults get allergies, because doctors don’t see symptoms. However, testing with the Body Monitor Test Kit shows excess calcium secreted into the urine when people eat foods to which they react. Blood tests for the various immunoglobulins (markers for immune responses) have also shown reactions when the patient reports no symptoms.
Disease follows allergy because one immune weakness creates more. The allergan acts like sugar, stress or anything else to which you react. An allergy to milk may mean lots of undigested calcium that may show up as dental plaque, hardened arteries, or the lactose may spike your insulin response as if you had eaten regular sugar. What disease you’ll get depends on your genetic profile and your genes’ interaction with your bad diet or unrequited stress.
Most people are allergic to: sugar and most other sweeteners, caffeine, alcohol, wheat, dairy, chocolate, corn and anything that you eat with a lot of sugar or that you overcook. A person can be allergic to anything if they abuse it by eating it with sugar.
Some allergies are not permanent. Dr. Appleton reports that her allergy to onions finally went away after several years of keeping it out of her diet and ceasing the sugar. However, even after 30 years she still can’t eat chocolate, beef, chicken, eggs, cheese or any other dairy, except butter on her potatoes.
The entire program is based on a regular testing regime for which you will need the Body Monitor and a diet in which you remove all harmful foods. The idea is that you remove these foods for a period of time and then gradually reintroduce them one at a time. Using the kit you will test your urine one hour after eating a suspect food. Seven drops each of both your urine and the reagent is enough for a single test. If you have a reaction then you are allergic to the tested food and you should keep it out of your diet. Cloudy means too much calcium excreted into the urine; this is bad. Clear urine means not enough calcium secreted; this is also bad. Slightly hazy is normal and is a good indicator of homeostasis. You’ll see results instantly when you hold the test tube up to any piece of paper with text on it. You should have a slight problem reading the text, any other result is a problem. Please refer to the instruction booklet or Lick the Sugar Habit for more information about urine and saliva testing.
In each of her books, Dr. Appleton has listed three food plans at the back. Food Plan Three is restrictive, but is designed to mimic the Paleolithic Diet of reasonable amounts of protein and lots of vegetables. Fruit is not part of Food Plan Three because it has enough sugar to keep an unhealthy person out of homeostasis. You have to heal before fruit can be reintroduced, so fruit is part of Food Plans Two and One. Regardless or which plan you choose, you have to modify the plans to keep whatever you’re allergic to out of your diet.
Additionally, if you’re coming to this site having tried some other health information, none of the food plans conflict with anything else. Vegetarians/vegans can eat even from Food Plan Three if they realize the real problem is sugar, honey, molasses and other sweeteners and not animal proteins per se. Vegetarians can eat beans, whole grains and vegetables to get their protein. Also, the doctor says that those who eat according to their metabolic or blood type will also find plenty of food to eat on any of the food plans.
Stress management, exercise and the mental side of things are also important. Bad feelings also upset your body chemistry causing allergies and disease. Don’t eat if you feel stressed until you’ve meditated, prayed, exercised, written in the journal and so forth. Everyone gets stress, especially if there’s a freeway nearby. But, dealing with it properly helps keep you healthy. Don’t let stress become distress!
These concepts are basically the core of Dr. Appleton’s program. The idea is now that you have some information and start testing your own homeostasis you will figure out your own health program after consulting your doctor. Maybe you need to cut out the ice cream, those French fries or perhaps you eat too much of a good thing and should cut your plate size in half.
YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT YOU EAT, WHAT YOU SAY, HOW YOU FEEL AND HOW MUCH YOU MOVE YOUR BODY. Thus you are responsible for your health. Sickness doesn’t just happen no matter what the least knowledgeable doctors say. Now you have some information to take charge of your own health.

Read Full Post »