Insurance Companies Use Bait-and-Switch Tactics to Maintain the Status Quo of Mercury Amalgams

Sunscreen Won't Prevent Skin Cancer but Some Could Actually Cause It

By Dr. Mercola

Does wearing sunscreen prevent skin cancer? If you listen to public health officials that urge every man, woman and child to slather on sunscreen every day, you would think the answer is an unequivocal yes.

Aside from those who use sunscreen for the purpose of preventing wrinkles, it’s a safe assumption that many people use it with the intent of preventing skin cancer. But here’s the rub: wearing sunscreen may not actually protect you from cancer and, in some cases, may actually increase your risk.

Daily Sunscreen Use Versus Occasional Use: No Difference in Skin Cancer Rates

A Cochrane Review attempted to determine whether the use of topical sunscreen and physical sun-protective methods (such as wearing protective clothing, hats, and seeking shade) prevented the development of basal cell carcinoma (BCC) and cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) compared to taking no precautionary measures.¹

There wasn’t much data on the topic to be found, so the review includes the results of just one study, which compared the daily application of sunscreen with the occasional use of sunscreen over a period of 4.5 years.

Among the more than 1,600 Australian participants, there was no difference between the numbers of people who developed BCC or cSCC (the most common types of skin cancer) in the two groups during the trial period.

As noted in the Cochrane Review, “So, there did not seem to be a difference in applying sunscreen daily compared with using it occasionally.”²

While I certainly don’t recommend spending so much time in the sun that your skin gets burned, the one-size-fits-all recommendation from public health officials to apply sunscreen daily may be causing more harm than good.

The fact is, sunlight offers many benefits to your health, the majority of which are only beginning to be understood. Meanwhile, most sunscreens contain harmful chemicals and may not protect your skin from overexposure the way you think they do. Some may even increase your risk of cancer.

Certain Sunscreens May Speed the Development of Skin Cancer

Close to 16 percent of U.S. sunscreens contain vitamin A, which sounds like a natural addition that might be beneficial for your skin, acting as an antioxidant.

However, retinyl palmitate, a form of vitamin A, has been found to promote the development of skin tumors and lesions when applied topically and exposed to sunlight.³

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) National Center for Toxicological Research (NTP) has been studying the ability of vitamin A ingredients to trigger skin cancer when exposed to the sun for more than a decade.

One study on hairless mice revealed that the development of skin tumors was accelerated when a vitamin-A-laced cream was applied to the mice and then exposed to ultraviolet light daily for one year.⁴

Despite the known risks, these ingredients are still found in sunscreens with no warnings to consumers. The Environmental Working Group (EWG) reported:⁵

“Six years after EWG sounded the alarm about retinyl palmitate, the FDA still hasn’t completed follow-up studies that will allow the agency to take a position on the safety of vitamin A and related chemicals in cosmetics and sunscreens.

Most cosmetics companies have not removed these ingredients from sunscreens and other skin and lip products … EWG calls for sunscreen makers to voluntarily stop adding this ingredient to sunscreens until there is proof that it can be safely used on sun-exposed skin. …

EWG recommends that consumers avoid sunscreens and other skin and lip products containing vitamin A, retinyl palmitate, retinol, retinyl acetate, retinyl linoleate, and retinoic acid.”

The SPF Myth: Is Higher SPF Really Better?

Dermatologists at Northwestern University in Chicago conducted a survey to assess people’s understanding of sunscreen labels.⁶ Many people consider SPF (sun protection factor) as a leading factor in their decision of which sunscreen to buy, despite the fact that, in the study, fewer than half knew what SPF meant.

Meanwhile, most of the people surveyed believed that SPF 30 offered double the sun protection of SPF 15. It’s an understandable assumption, but one that’s blatantly false. In fact, the difference between the two is much smaller — about 4 percent.

While an SPF 15 sunscreen should filter out about 93 percent of UVB (ultraviolet B) rays, SPF 30 filters out about 97 percent. Higher SPFs offer only minute benefits beyond this, with SPF 50 blocking 98 percent, and SPF 100 blocking 99 percent, of UVB rays.⁷

While SPF works by absorbing, reflecting or scattering the sun's rays on your skin, its protective ability is not linear and does not offer a great deal more protection at higher levels.

SPF Refers Only to Protection Against UVB Rays, Not UVA

In regard to SPF, another important factor to remember is that an SPF rating refers only to protection against UVB rays, which are the rays within the ultraviolet spectrum that allows your body to produce vitamin D in your skin.

But the most dangerous rays, in terms of causing skin damage and cancer are UVA rays. According to EWG:⁸

“A sunscreen lotion’s SPF rating has little to do with the product’s ability to shield the skin from UVA rays. As a result of the FDA’s restrictions on ingredients and concentrations, U.S. sunscreens offer far less protection against UVA than UVB, particularly those products with the highest SPF.

Because UVA and UVB protection do not harmonize, high-SPF products suppress sunburn much more effectively than other types of sun damage.”

Not to mention, studies show that high-SPF products may not offer the SPF they claim. One study found that even small differences in testing conditions of an SPF 100 sunscreen yielded results between SPF 37 and 75.⁹

The amount of sunscreen applied, sunlight intensity, sweat, swimming and more can all affect how much sun protection you actually receive. There’s also evidence that people tend to stay in the sun longer when wearing high-SPF sunscreens, putting them at risk of overexposure.¹⁰

No Evidence in Support of Full-Body Screening for Skin Cancer?

The nervousness people experience over threats of skin cancer such as melanoma is augmented by U.S. government intervention that equates sun exposure with skin cancer.¹¹

Yet, at the same time, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) says there’s not enough evidence that screening for skin cancer can lower skin cancer cases or deaths.

Still, European studies suggest that after public awareness campaigns to inform people about whole body visual screening for skin cancer, the rates of melanoma, the most deadly type of skin cancer, and non-melanoma skin cancers went down, Time reported.¹² According to The Washington Post:¹³

“An editorial accompanying the task force’s statement said the ‘I’ rating [insufficient evidence] does not mean there is not a benefit from screening but that more research is needed to determine if it should be recommended — and, if so, for whom.

… the statement doesn’t apply to people who have skin lesions or any other kind of suspicious growths or to those with an increased risk of cancer or a family history of the disease.”

Optimal Vitamin D Levels Linked to 65 Percent Lower Risk of Cancer

Another way that wearing sunscreen daily has the potential to increase your cancer risk rather than decrease it is by blocking your body’s ability to produce vitamin D.

If you do not get regular sun exposure on your bare skin (or consume a vitamin D3 supplement), there’s a good chance you may be vitamin D deficient, which is a risk factor for cancer. One recent study published in PLOS One found vitamin D levels above 40 ng/mL are associated with a more than 65 percent lower risk of cancer. According to the researchers:¹⁴

“We found a clear association between 25(OH)D [vitamin D] serum concentration and cancer risk, according to multiple types of analyses. These results suggest the importance of vitamin D for the prevention of cancer. Women with 25(OH)D concentrations ≥40 ng/ml had a significantly lower risk of cancer (~70 [percent]) compared to women with concentrations <20 ng/ml.”

Optimizing your vitamin D levels may reduce your risk of as many as 16 different types of cancer, including pancreatic, lung, ovarian, breast, prostate and skin cancers.

Higher Vitamin D Levels at Melanoma Diagnosis May Improve Prognosis

Studies show melanoma mortality actually decreases after UV exposure. Additionally, melanoma lesions do not tend to appear primarily on sun-exposed skin, which is why sunscreens have proven ineffective in preventing it. Exposure to sunlight, particularly UVB, is protective against melanoma (the deadliest form of skin cancer) — or rather, the vitamin D your body produces in response to UVB radiation is protective. The following passage comes from The Lancet:¹⁵

"Paradoxically, outdoor workers have a decreased risk of melanoma compared with indoor workers, suggesting that chronic sunlight exposure can have a protective effect."

In another recent study, it was found that vitamin D deficiency at the time of melanoma diagnosis is associated with thicker tumors that likely have a poorer prognosis.¹⁶

The researchers believe increasing vitamin D levels to 20 ng/ml or higher (which is actually still a deficiency state) could result in 18 percent of melanoma patients having thinner tumors and therefore improved prognosis. If their levels were increased to optimal levels (50-70 ng/ml), it’s likely this rate would improve even more.

Oxybenzone: Another Reason Why Many Sunscreens Are Dangerous

Oxybenzone, a popular sunscreen ingredient that has been detected in nearly every American, is believed to cause hormone disruptions and cell damage that may provoke cancer.

This endocrine-disrupting chemical acts like estrogen in your body, alters sperm production in animals and is also associated with endometriosis in women. It has relatively high rates of skin allergy and is a highly skin-penetrating chemical.¹⁷ According to the Environmental Working Group (EWG):¹⁸

"…the chemical oxybenzone penetrates the skin, gets into the bloodstream and acts like estrogen in the body. It can trigger allergic reactions. Data are preliminary, but studies have found a link between higher concentrations of oxybenzone and health harms.

One study has linked oxybenzone to endometriosis in older women; another found that women with higher levels of oxybenzone during pregnancy had lower birth weight daughters."

There’s really no reason to risk exposure to this chemical, as safer alternatives exist. In lieu of the skin-penetrating hormone-disrupting chemicals like oxybenzone, safer sunscreens tend to use non-nanoparticle sized zinc- and titanium-based mineral ingredients, which block the sun's rays without penetrating your skin.

Four Steps to Safely Enjoying the Sun

Applying chemical sunscreens every time you step outdoors may do little to prevent your risk of skin cancer while raising other risks. In addition, you’re blocking your body’s production of vitamin D and possibly some of sunlight’s other health benefits, like its pain-relieving properties. That being said, you don’t want to overexpose your skin to the sun and end up with a sunburn, either. To continuously enjoy the positive effects of sun exposure without getting burned, I recommend following these simple safety tips:

1. Protect your face and eyes by wearing a wide-brimmed hat or a cap. The skin around these areas is much thinner than other areas of your body and is more at risk for cosmetic photo damage and premature wrinkling. If it's too hot to protect your skin by covering with light clothing, and you’ll be outside for extended periods, be sure to use a natural mineral-based broad-spectrum sunscreen on your skin — these products often contain zinc.

2. Limit your initial sun exposure and slowly work your way up. If you are a fairly light-skinned individual who tends to burn easily, limit your initial exposure to just a few minutes, especially if it is in the middle of summer. The more tanned your skin gets, the longer you can stay in the sun without burning. If it is early or late in the season and/or you are a dark-skinned individual, you could likely safely have 30 minutes on your initial exposure.

3. Build an internal sunscreen with beneficial antioxidants. Astaxanthin, a potent antioxidant, can be used both internally and topically to protect your skin from the sun. You can make your own lotion by adding astaxanthin to organic coconut oil, but be careful of staining your clothing, as astaxanthin is dark red.

Other helpful antioxidants include proanthocyanidins, resveratrol and lycopene. Eating healthy is also important. Fresh, raw, unprocessed foods deliver the nutrients your body needs to maintain a healthy balance of omega-6 and omega-3 oils in your skin, which is your first line of defense against sunburn.

Fresh, raw vegetables also provide your body with an abundance of powerful antioxidants that will help you fight the free radicals caused by sun damage that can lead to burns and cancer.

4. Moisturize your skin naturally. Before sunbathing, apply organic coconut oil on the exposed areas of your skin (as noted above, you could add some astaxanthin to the oil for an added measure of protection). This will not only moisturize your skin to prevent dryness but will also give you additional metabolic benefits.

from La Mav Combined http://snip.ly/nf11k
via IFTTT

Coke's Cookie Is Crumbling

The Power of Pain

I spent a long time avoiding pain. Escape WAS my medicine. This is what my 11 years on Rx drugs were about: numbing out, tuning out, zoning out – anything but zooming in and looking right at the source. Yes, they were prescribed to me by a doctor. No, I didn’t have to go out [...]

The post The Power of Pain appeared first on The Organic Life.

from La Mav Combined http://snip.ly/bfxvq
via IFTTT

How Do You Know If You Have an Ulcer?

How Microbes Moved From Villain to Hero

By Dr. Mercola

Microbes live inside all of us. The idea of a "microscopic menagerie" teeming and thriving in your cells, your intestines and your brain might make you a little uncomfortable, but this is good news, according to the latest science.

U.K.-based science writer Ed Yong's new book, "I Contain Multitudes: The Microbes Within Us and a Grander View of Life," says microbiomes — the fungi, bacteria, viruses and other minuscule critters — are necessary "partners" for the betterment of our immune systems.

Your microbiomes change constantly, and what you eat makes a big difference in the kind of microbes your body contains. When people begin improving their diets, the number and integrity of their microbes improve. In fact, through your diet, you can, to a degree, switch them out, Yong asserted:

"It seems that dietary fiber is a really important driver of microbial diversity in our bodies. Fiber consists of large numbers of different carbohydrates — many we can't digest, but our bacteria in our guts can. If we eat low-fiber diets, we narrow the range of our microbial partners.

Simple measures like probiotics — adding a few strains of microbes in the hope that they will take hold and remedy health problems — have been largely unsuccessful. It will take more

… If we want to add microbes to our bodies, we'll need to think about whether we need to eat certain foods to nourish the microbes we're taking."¹

Human gut bacteria may have existed for millions of years, maybe before the evolution of people.

A recent study asserts that three types of gut bacteria affected intestinal development, fought off germs and may have influenced mood and behavior and were reportedly present in African great apes that lived more than 10 million years ago.

Scientists believe the bacteria "evolved into distinct strains as humans and great apes went their separate evolutionary ways." Study authors hope similar gut microbes can be eventually traced past amphibians and even vertebrates.²

How Science Approaches 'Fixing' Broken Microbiome Function

While microbiome science is still in the early stages, scientists have explored why certain foods are good for us and others aren't. The connection between food, microbes and health are all inextricably intertwined, and unraveling the mysteries may shed light on how they affect our metabolism.

Fiber, for instance, is good for many of our gut bacteria, so eating more veggies certainly won't hurt. Microbiome researcher Jeff Leach told NPR³ that too little might starve the good bacteria, and "when we starve our bacteria they eat us. They eat the mucus lining — the mucin in our large intestine."

Fiber feeds your bacteria and gives off nourishing nutrients for your gut lining. Veggies are high-fiber foods, so eating a variety and as much of the whole thing as possible is recommended.

Garlic and onions also have antimicrobial properties; garlic impairs some of the undesirable bacteria but leaves the good ones. As Leach explained:

"Those vegetables contain high levels of a type of fiber called inulin, which feeds actinobacteria in our guts. In fact, inulin is considered a probiotic, since it feeds the good bacteria, or probiotics, that live inside us."

He added that slight or short-term diet tweaks may not make much of a difference in gut health, but moving from ingesting 10 to 15 grams of fiber a day to more like 40 or 50, "you may see some changes."

The Gut-Brain Axis: How Your Brain Influences Hunger

Scientists at Rockefeller University used magnetic stimulation in the ventromedial hypothalamus part of the brains of genetically engineered mice to "switch on" neurons to see how the brain might influence appetite. According to Scientific American, they found that the procedure:

"Increased the rodents' blood sugar levels and decreased levels of the hormone insulin. Turning on the neurons also caused the mice to eat more than their control counterparts …

They inhibited these neurons and saw the opposite effects: it drove blood sugar down, elevated insulin levels and suppressed the animals' urge to consume their chow."⁴

Scientists have been aware for over a century that the brain "talks to the mind" through nerve connections, as well as biochemical signals such as hormones, to affect metabolism in a connection called the "gut-brain axis."

Studies have concentrated on the communication pathways between the nervous and digestive systems to treat metabolic disorders, especially since obesity and metabolic disease is increasing steadily worldwide.

Four in 10 women in the U.S. are considered obese⁵ and diabetes prevalence has almost quadrupled since 1980, so scientists and pharmaceutical companies are working on the gut-brain link with increased urgency to devise drugs, surgery, devices and probiotic approaches.

In 2011, Dr. Serguei Fetissov from Rouen University in France started his company TargEDys to develop treatment programs for metabolic disorders and conducted mice studies using Escherichia coli (E. coli) intestinal bacteria to reduce their appetite. Scientific American reported:

"Fetissov is trying to replicate these effects in the rodents by using a probiotic to hasten the proliferation of E. coli and boost production of appetite-reducing proteins, rather than by administering injections of the bacterial protein products."⁶

Early in 2016, TargEDys announced plans for clinical trials using freeze-dried probiotic bacteria in capsule form to use on humans and hoping to replicate the appetite-suppressing effects seen in the mice trials. Similarly, a potential therapy for anorexia patients or elderly involves bacteria to stimulate hunger.

The More (Good) Fat a Pregnant Mom Eats, the Better Her Baby's Gut Health

Unborn babies have microbes, too, and scientists believe the mother's fat intake may affect how healthy the mix of those microbes is, another study revealed.

More than 150 women participated, recording what they ate during their pregnancy. Researchers said their diets contained an average of 33 percent fat, which they considered good since the optimal amount is 20 percent to 35 percent.

However, the levels ranged between 14 percent and 55 percent, so some were inordinately low and others, high by conventional standards. Emerging evidence actually suggests your dietshould be at least half healthy fat and possibly as high as 70 percent.

Gut microbiomes of the babies born to moms who ate a higher-fat diet had fewer Bacteroide microbes at birth and weeks afterward, positively affecting immune system development and energy extraction from food.

Finding the link between fewer Bacteroides and the moms' high-fat diet during pregnancy was a surprise to the researchers, including Dr. Kjersti Aagaard, senior study author and associate professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Baylor College of Medicine and Texas Children's Hospital in Houston. According to Medicine Net:

"Diet is very amenable to change, and women are highly motivated to make healthy changes during pregnancy. Traditionally, dietary interventions during pregnancy have focused on micronutrients, such as iron and folic acid.

We speculate that there may be a sound argument to also discuss and estimate fat intake."⁷

Getting the Right Microbes Early May Ward Off Certain Diseases

The make-up of babies' digestive tract microbes might have something to do with whether or not they develop asthma later in life, scientists reported.

In fact, their study on 319 babies revealed that low levels of four specific bacteria — Rothia, Lachnospira, Veillonella and Faecalibacterium — indicated a higher risk of the breathing disorder by age 3.⁸ Conversely, when the babies' intestines revealed higher levels of the microbes, their chances of asthma were much greater.

Brett Finlay, Ph.D., a University of British Columbia microbiologist, said asthma, which is becoming increasingly common, is really an immune allergic-type reaction in the lungs. Several factors raise or lower the risk, Finlay told NPR:

"There's all these smoking guns like, for example, if you breast-feed versus bottle feed you have less asthma. If you're born by C-section instead of vaginal birth you have a 20 percent higher rate of asthma. If you get antibiotics in the first year of life you have more asthma."⁹

Further: "The microbiomes of kids who aren't breast-fed and are born by cesarean section may miss out on getting helpful bugs. Antibiotics can kill off the good bacteria that seem important for the development of healthy immune systems."

Mice studies indicated that those microbes influence how peoples' immune systems develop later in life. Although the researchers aren't sure how, a possible link might be the fact that babies with low levels of the four microbes were also low in acetate, which may be tied to immune system regulation. Though it is likely years away, confirming their supposition may lead to the next step in scientists' studies: Seeing if the missing microbes might be replenished. In the meantime, NPR reported:

"More breast feeding, fewer C-sections and more careful use of antibiotics could go a long way toward nurturing the microbes babies need to avoid asthma and other diseases."¹⁰

Review: 'Bacteroides: the Good, the Bad, and the Nitty-Gritty'

A Clinical Microbiology review titled "Bacteroides: the Good, the Bad, and the Nitty-Gritty,"¹¹ noted that Bacteroides contain "the most antibiotic resistance mechanisms and the highest resistance rates of all anaerobic pathogens." They have a symbiotic relationship with the host unless they escape to other areas of the body, causing harm.

"By a variety of measures, the species Homo sapiens is more microbial than human. Microorganisms comprise only a small, albeit significant, percentage of the body weight (between 2 and 5 pounds of live bacteria). However, in terms of cell numbers, we are about 10 [percent] human and 90 [percent] bacterial!

Consequently, bacteria play a major role in bodily functions, including immunity, digestion and protection against disease. Colonization of the human body by microorganisms occurs at the very beginning of human life, and many of these organisms become truly indigenous to the host."

A subspecies of bacteria called B. infantis feeds on sugars in breast milk, known as human milk oligosaccharides. Because babies can't digest the sugars, they're food for the microbes rather than the babies. According to Yong:

"These sugars are sort of a way of setting up a baby's first microbiome, ensuring that the right species set up shop rather than those that are likely to cause disease. And it's fascinating to me to think of this very common act, breastfeeding, through this new microbial lens."¹²

Incidentally, more than one scientist has lamented the fact that the microbiomes humans have maintained in their systems for millennia are declining due in part to germ phobia in Western society, such as the prevalence of antibiotics and hand sanitizers.

Fighting Poop With Poop, or The Great Poop Exchange

Clostridium difficile, commonly known as C. diff., is a "hardy bacterium" that instigates stubborn, recurring diarrhea. It may seem contradictory to treat such a condition with a microbe transplant — aka fecal transplant — but it's a treatment that's becoming more common. According to Yong:

"Fecal transplants have been used to treat this condition many times over in many countries. It's been tested in randomized controlled studies, which is the gold standard. The first trial had to be stopped early because [the transplants were so successful that] it seemed unethical to not put all of the patients on this treatment."¹³

C. diff is an invasive microbe, unlike irritable bowel or inflammatory bowel disease, because as it's zapped by a plethora of antibiotics, necessary microbes "collapse," opening the door, so to speak, for the microbes in a donor stool to invade. Yong told NPR:

"It might just be that C. diff. was the low hanging fruit. That said, fecal transplants are arguably our most successful microbiome-based therapy. They show some important principles that we might like to take heed of like the fact that [the treatment] is a community-based approach."¹⁴

At Brown University, where another program focuses on digestive system microbes such as bacteria, fungi and viruses (human microbiomes), scientists say problems with C. diff. started when antibiotics prescribed for another condition altogether disturbed what, again, may have been perfectly functioning, benign gut organisms. Colleen Kelly, a doctor in the program, said microbe transplants are being tested for other conditions as well, including Crohn's disease, colitis and diabetes — even obesity.

"We're at a really interesting point in medicine where we've come to appreciate the microbiome and that [these organisms] have really integral roles in ... energy metabolism, and immune function, and all of these other things."¹⁵

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is said to have "big concerns" over microbiome transplants, comparing them to snake oil. As such, the FDA restricts doctors' use of the procedure for anything other than C. diff. unless they get FDA approval.

from La Mav Combined http://snip.ly/4m869
via IFTTT

Can a Supplement Help Prevent Kidney Stones?

By Dr. Mercola

Anyone who's ever experienced the pain (and sometimes agony) of a kidney stone may have thought afterward, "Wouldn't it be great if they came up with something that could prevent that?"

As is so often the case in science, such visualizations are the same as those of researchers. In this instance, a dietary supplement with the power to dissolve the little troublemakers before they wreak havoc in your system may be the solution.

Researchers at the University of Houston (UH) are calling it a possible "prevention tool." You may be thinking that if it could actually do that, it might be more like a wonder drug.

Calcium oxylate crystals, which make up the bulk of these minute-but-mighty troublemakers, are essentially hard mineral deposits that form in the kidneys.

The problem starts when they become lodged in your urinary tract and won't budge. One or more may restrict the flow of urine, causing another level of discomfort. According to MedicineNet.com:

"The calcium oxalate crystals that are the most common component of kidney stones, [are the] mineral deposits that form inside the kidneys. They may get stuck in the urinary tract, blocking urination and causing great pain."¹

If the stone happens to be small, it may pass through your urinary tract unnoticed. But if it's a large one, it's not pleasant. Daily Mail reported that in Hungary, the largest kidney stone ever recorded weighed nearly 2.5 pounds.² Needless to say, larger stones require surgical removal.

Kidney Stone Symptoms

The technical location for kidney stones is the tube that connects your kidney and bladder, called the ureter. When they develop, the previously referenced symptoms³ can include:

✓ A persistent urge to urinate	✓ Fever and chills (indicating infection)	✓ Bloody and/or cloudy urine	✓ Pain when urinating
✓ Episodes of pain lasting 20 minutes to an hour	✓ Nausea and/or vomiting	✓ Pain radiating down your side and back to your groin and lower abdomen

Hydroxycitrate From the Garcinia Cambogia: Possible Kidney Stone Prevention

The study, published in Nature⁴ in mid-2016, described the development of the kidney stone supplement, an extract of a compound called hydroxycitrate from the Asian garcinia cambogia fruit, also known as Malabar tamarind.

Hydroxycitrate is capable, under certain conditions, of not only dissolving the crystals but also inhibiting their growth. If all goes as they hope, hydroxycitrate would be the most dramatic advance in treating kidney stones in three decades.

Scientists expect the supplement will be a viable alternative to potassium citrate (such as the brand Urocit-K⁵) which, while it's effective in relieving kidney stone-passing pain, often includes side effects that rival the misery of what they they're designed to remedy:

• Upset stomach
• Nausea
• Vomiting
• Diarrhea
• Cardiac arrest

However, rigorous trials in humans have not yet begun. It's actually just a concept, so far, but one that makes sense. Jeffrey Rimer, lead study author and associate professor of chemical engineering at UH, said he and his colleagues conducted a combination of studies, some experimental.

Studies Involving Hydroxycitrate

According to Science Daily,⁶ in studies pitting citrate (CA) against hydroxycitrate (HCA), both inhibited calcium oxalate crystal growth, but the latter was "more potent and displayed unique qualities that are advantageous for the development of new therapies."

"The team of researchers then used atomic force microscopy, or AFM, to study interactions between the crystals, CA and HCA under realistic growth conditions … the technique allowed them to record crystal growth in real time with near-molecular resolution.

[Jihae] Chung [a UH graduate student who worked on the study] noted that the AFM images recorded the crystal actually shrinking when exposed to specific concentrations of HCA.

 Rimer suspected the initial finding was an abnormality, as it is rare to see a crystal actually dissolve in highly supersaturated growth solutions. The most effective inhibitors reported in the literature simply stop the crystal from growing."

What Chung saw turned out to be accurate, precipitating the next step: determining how and why the crystals shrank. Two other study authors applied density functional theory (DFT):

" … [A] highly accurate computational method used to study the structure and properties of materials … to address how HCA and CA bind to calcium and to calcium oxalate crystals.

They discovered HCA formed a stronger bond with crystal surfaces, inducing a strain that is seemingly relieved by the release of calcium and oxalate, leading to crystal dissolution." ⁷

The next step required that humans be included in the testing, so seven participants took hydroxycitrate for three days, which was long enough for researchers to establish that it was expelled through their urine, one of the requirements for using the supplement as a treatment.

While long-term safety needs to be established, as do dosages and more trials on humans, Rimer believes the initial findings are promising:

"If it works in vivo, similar to our trials in the laboratory, HCA has the potential to reduce the incidence rate of people with chronic kidney stone disease."⁸

Giannis Mpourmpakis, Ph.D., another study author and assistant professor of chemical and petroleum engineering at Pittsburgh University's Swanson School of Engineering, said:

"We were very excited to identify a molecular-level mechanism under which calcium oxalate grows and degrades in its natural environment. Eventually, this will help us control the crystal's life cycle."⁹

Stats on Kidney Stones

The healthiest kidneys function in a number of ways for optimum health. Most importantly, they filter all the blood in your body every half hour, removing waste and excess fluid, according to the National Kidney Foundation.¹⁰ They also:

✓ Regulate your fluid levels	✓ Activate vitamin D for strong bones	✓ Release the hormone for red blood cell production
✓ Keep blood minerals in balance	✓ Release a blood-regulating hormone

More than half a million people in the U.S. hit the emergency room for relief from what is often termed excruciating pain from kidney stones. Unfortunately, the condition is becoming more and more prevalent. To date, they affect what's estimated to be 12 percent of men and 7 percent of women. Harvard Health reports:

"For many, kidney stones aren't a one-time thing: In about half of people who have had one, another appears within seven years without preventive measures. Most stones occur when calcium combines with one of two substances: oxalate or phosphorous. Stones can also form from uric acid, which forms as the body metabolizes protein."¹¹

Kidney stones also increase your risk of developing chronic kidney disease. Sobering statistics include:

✓ High blood pressure and diabetes are the two leading causes of kidney disease12	✓ Around 26 million American adults have kidney disease and don't know it	✓ One in 3 American adults are currently at risk13
✓ Kidney disease is the ninth leading cause of death in the U.S.	✓ Every year, kidney disease kills more people than breast or prostate cancers	✓ Kidney disease is the ninth leading cause of death in the U.S.
✓ African Americans are 3.5 times more likely to have kidney failure14	✓ Once kidneys fail, either dialysis or a kidney transplant is required	✓ In 2013, more than 47,000 Americans died from kidney disease15
✓ Every day, 13 people die waiting for a kidney16

Ways to Prevent Kidney Stones

Most doctors know that one of the most prevalent causes of kidney stones (aka nephrolithiasis) is dehydration, so drinking plenty of water is one of the best ways to prevent their development. Conditions such as diabetes, high blood pressure and obesity increase the risk.

Another recommendation is to limit your protein intake to one-half gram of protein per pound of lean body mass, which would place most people in the range of 40 to 70 grams daily (1 1/2 to 2 1/2 ounces). If you're prone to kidney stones, excess amounts of red meat can be especially problematic because it decreases the levels of citrate, the chemical in urine that helps keep kidney stones from forming in the first place.

Most Americans consume far more protein than they need, which can exacerbate problems with kidney stones. When you consume more protein than your body needs, your body must remove more nitrogen waste products from your blood, which stresses your kidneys.¹⁷ Chronic dehydration can result. Doctors also encourage people at risk for kidney stones to pass up foods containing high amounts of oxalate,¹⁸ including:

✓ Swiss chard	✓ Beets	✓ Tea
✓ Sweet potatoes	✓ Rhubarb	✓ Chocolate
✓ Okra	✓ Almonds	✓ Spinach

However, these foods contain high amounts of magnesium, which helps prevent calcium from blending with oxalate, the most common kidney stone type. Magnesium is a mineral that has the capacity to prevent kidney stones — if you get enough.

Magnesium deficiency is estimated to affect as much as 80 percent of the American population. It's been associated with kidney stone development because it plays a part in the way your body handles calcium. Too much calcium can become toxic, so there needs to be a balance.

from La Mav Combined http://snip.ly/w018v
via IFTTT