Dietary Enigmas
asking questions about our diet
-
Archive of "health" Category
Understanding About Diabetes
The Glycemic Index
Your health is the most important part of your life. With out your health you can not take care of family or yourself. You can start by fixing your diet. Once you get your diet under control then you can move on from there with exercise and other personal health care activities. Lets look into diet and the glycemic index.
The Glycemic Index is a common food ranking system that is used to determine the overall effect that particular foods play when it comes to the issue of the glucose level in the blood. It has been discovered that food types that are carbohydrate based and break down in a quick manner in the process of digestion have the highest index when it comes to the Glycemic Index. This means that the overall response from the sugar levels in the blood is relatively fast and occurs at a very high rate. If the same type of foods breakdown at a slow rate, then it is said that those foods have a low Glycemic Index.
There should be an emphasis on the Glycemic Index when it comes to the foods that we consume and our diet in general. The following groups of people should be especially concerned about this:
1. Individuals who have diabetes, or those who are at high risk for developing this medical condition
2. Those who are engaging in a diet program
3. Individuals who are involved in athletics
4. Individuals who suffer from medical conditions like a resistance to insulin, and even Syndrome X
5. Those who suffer from the effects of hypoglycemia
If foods that are consumed have a high index as far as glycemics is concerned, there are many complications that can arise. The following outlines the many problems that may develop when it comes to the foods that break down the fastest when it comes to digestion:
1. Individuals who experience foods with a Glycemic Index that is really high often experience small bursts of hyperactivity and long periods of fatigue immediately thereafter.
2. Those who consume these foods often find that their physical performance is hindered a great deal.
3. Those who consume these types of foods are most likely to gain weight more quickly than individuals who consume foods that have a low Glycemic Index.
If you are concerned about your weight, your blood glucose level, and your health in general, it is absolutely imperative to ensure that you learn as much as you are able when it comes to the Glycemic Index.
carbohydrate diabetes diet exercise fatigue food types glucose level health care activities high risk hyperactivity insulin long periods low glycemic index medical conditions personal health care physical performance resistance sugar levels carbohydrate diabetes diet exercise fatigue food types glucose level health care activities high risk hyperactivity insulin long periods low glycemic index medical conditions personal health care physical performance resistance sugar levels
1000 Calorie Low Glycemic Index DietTrehalose is here in EU/UK
We are delighted that Trehalose has been made available in the UK to end user customers. The prices are quite reasonable and the quality is excellent. Click herealzhiemers artificial sweeteners artificial sweetener artificial sweeteners artificial sweetener saccharin aspartame blood sugar levels carbohydrates complex carbohydrates control diabetes diabetes diabetics diet food food companies fructose corn syrup nutrasweet splenda sucralose sugar Trehalose type 2 diabetes alzhiemers artificial sweeteners artificial sweetener artificial sweeteners artificial sweetener saccharin aspartame blood sugar levels carbohydrates complex carbohydrates control diabetes diabetes diabetics diet food food companies fructose corn syrup nutrasweet splenda sucralose sugar Trehalose type 2 diabetesUS Centre for Disease Control - switch emphasis to prevention
I gather from something I read yesterday that the US CDC has begun to recognise that the over reliance on medication has proved to be such a threat to the US economy and security that it has announced a dramatic change in emphasis. I’ve been able to validate the source of the report and looking at the CDC website there is some evidence of a change. However, I remember the UK Cancer Charity said much the same 3 or 4 years ago but I’ve not seen any change in approach yet. So I’m sceptical that the pharmaceutical lobby will not resist such a change.
However, if its true then it could herald the best dawn we’ve seen in years. Yes we all agree that wellness (the absence of disease) must be our focus and for the US CDC to come out and say so is huge. Our approach has to be to keep people as well as possible for as long as possible and when disease does rear its head then treat by the best means we have.Presently only about 5% of healthcare money goes on prevention - what would happen if that multiplied by a factor of 5 times. Would that make a dent in the problem - yes of course it would. Imagine what that would accomplish! However, and it isa serious thought where are the food companies in all of this discussion - because unless they change their approach too then the change is rather idealistic.
What would happen if we spent money, serious money, on studying the causes of illness and disease. I wonder how the pharmaceutical companies would feel if and when, together with the food industry, they had to face the music that they were not only part of the problem but also were exposed as the arch protagonists.
So then, health authorities see what is happening and are calling for a major shift to true health care. That’s a paradigm change — a radical change in thinking. And when such changes happen, they always occur suddenly, like a dam bursting.
So lets wait and see if the actions match the intent or for that matter what the food industry and pharmaceutical industry’s response will be. I guess they may try to stop it all by CODEX.
alternative and complementary medicine cancer charity causes of illness cdc cdc website dramatic change food companies food industry health care paradigm change pharmaceutical companies pharmaceutical industry pharmaceutical lobby prevention radical change true health alternative and complementary medicine cancer charity causes of illness cdc cdc website dramatic change food companies food industry health care paradigm change pharmaceutical companies pharmaceutical industry pharmaceutical lobby prevention radical change true healthLittle or No Evidence Supports Conventional Medical Treatments
I saw this article and couldn’t help echoing its sentiments.
by Barbara L. Minton (see all articles by this author)
(NaturalNews) Do you ever get the feeling that your doctor doesn’t know what he’s doing? Well, you are probably right. There is little or no evidence that today’s $2 trillion-dollar medical system works any better than various other alternatives. Whether you have diabetes, heart trouble, back pain or cancer, this judgment applies. If you are contemplating surgery, you should know that the orthodox disease establishment doctors have little clue about the success rates for the procedures they endorse.
Dr. David Eddy, a consultant for healthcare giant Kaiser Permanente and leader in the development of clinical evidenced based guidelines admits that the medical profession does not know what its doing, according to an article published by Alan Stang. Even today, with a high-tech health-care system that costs the nation so much money, there is little or no evidence that many widely used treatments and procedures actually work.
Eighty-five percent of what doctors do is not backed by hard evidence, which presumably means that only fifteen percent is. “Doctors dangerously over treat patients, because they get paid to treat; they don’t get paid not to treat,” claims Stang.
A hundred and fifty years ago, Ignaz Semmelweis claimed that his fellow physicians were killing women delivering babies in Vienna’s hospitals. Women were so terrified of hospitals that they considered a hospital stay the same as a death sentence. Their families had to bring them there by force because the women would try to escape. Semmelweis suspected that the reason for the deaths was that doctors were going from surgery to surgery without washing their hands. When he demanded that they scrub and sterilize their hands, the death rate dropped dramatically.
Although you would suspect that modern practitioners certainly wash their hands between patients, especially between surgeries, you would be wrong. Eighty percent of hospital infections happen today because doctors don’t wash their hands, resulting in deaths of thousands of people and costs of over a billion dollars a year. For instance, more than one-quarter of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center’s doctors don’t wash, because proper washing takes time and costs them money they would otherwise be making, according to an article in Business Week that interviewed some of the nation’s leading doctors.
According to these doctors, some of their colleagues are killing and robbing thousands of Americans a year. And these unindicted felons are the same critics calling for the power of the government to raid health food stores and throw so-called “alternative” practitioners into jail. These are also the same moral miscreants who use government propaganda to warn disease victims to reject any other treatment and therapy except theirs. They are the ones in collusion with the pharmaceutical companies who are trying to ban nutritional supplements with Codex Alimentarius. They point with their unwashed hands at anyone who dares to contradict them.
Stang recalls the story of Abraham Cherrix who had Hodgkin’s disease. The doctors told him to take chemotherapy so he did. It failed and the cancer returned. The chemo had left Abraham so weak that he couldn’t walk. He didn’t want to do it again, wanting instead to try “alternative” treatments to restore his immune system. Doctors used the courts to force him to again take the same chemotherapy that had failed him and left him so weak.
Abraham’s dad asked the social worker, “What will you do with my little boy? Will you take him somewhere and strap him down and put duct tape on his mouth and pump him full of this stuff if he doesn’t want it?” The social worker replied, “No, I will come to your house with a uniformed officer, and I will take your son by force if he resists. And I will take him to somebody else who will do that.” As the result of the huge public outrage over this case, Abraham finally won and was returned to his parent’s custody.
How could this have happened? The disease establishment is willing to do anything to protect and maintain its multi-billion dollar control of the people. Establishment medicine as practiced in the U.S. is monopoly medicine. Any threat to that monopoly is taken seriously. The four big players in monopoly medicine are the government, the AMA (American Medical Association), the drug companies, and the medical schools.
No matter how beneficial prevention modalities and alternative treatment modalities are to the people, they must be concealed, controlled, and done away with. There is a kind of psychic disconnect practiced by the establishment mentalities that want to do away with the means to prevent and treat conditions that may eventually threaten their own lives.
As the drug companies and politicians try to line us up for forced vaccinations and treatments, it’s good to remember that forced medical treatment was one of the main principles of Nazism. The Holocaust did not begin with the extermination of Jewish people. It ended with them.
The Holocaust began with the doctors when Hitler was still in jail during the Weimar Republic established after World War I. The Allies had promised Germany there would not be a punitive peace. Of course they lied and ended up imposing a ruinous war debt at the Versailles Conference. When Germany could not pay, the doctors decided to do their patriotic duty by eliminating “useless eaters”. They began with handicapped children and worked their way to criminals and beyond. Since doctors were running the program, the public swallowed it as just being “humane”. Only years later was this program known as the Holocaust, which many people today wrongly believe only exterminated the Jewish.
The fact that Business Week was able to publish much of this information in their cover story suggests that the disease establishment may be losing some of its control. But like many large beasts, monopoly medicine is probably more dangerous in its death throws.
Sources:
Author not noted, “Medical Guesswork”, Business Week, May 29, 2006.
Stang, Alan, “Today’s American Medicine: The Cure,” (www.AlanStang.com)
alternative and complementary medicine cancer complementary medicine costly medications disease mortality health traditional risk factors alternative and complementary medicine cancer complementary medicine costly medications disease mortality health traditional risk factorsDiabetes - Insulin Resistance
Diabetes is rife with complicated names for simple situations. Insulin Resistance is just one of these terms that needs explanation.
Insulin resistance occurs when the body’s cells become less responsive to insulin. Therefore, the body must secrete more insulin to maintain normal metabolism.
I find that using a simple analogy often helps. Imagine that you go to a bar and drink a pint of beer every day at athe same time. The result is that your body gets used to having alcohol in the system for most of the day. To get the same or similar effect in week 2 you’d probably need to drink twice the amount every day to get a similar effect. That is what happens with insulin resistance.
blood sugar levels diabetes diabetics diet insulin resistance insulin resistance metabolism nutrition obesity overweight pancreas refined carbohydrates sugar too fat Trehalose type 2 diabetes blood sugar levels diabetes diabetics diet insulin resistance insulin resistance metabolism nutrition obesity overweight pancreas refined carbohydrates sugar too fat Trehalose type 2 diabetes
Insulin resistance, which is very common, doesn’t cause type 2 diabetes by itself. The pancreas usually rallies to compensate for the resistance by pumping out more insulin. For most people with insulin resistance, blood sugar levels stay within a normal range. But for some, the insulin-producing cells eventually fail to keep up with the increased demand. Blood sugar levels rise, resulting in type 2 diabetes.Cholesterol - lowering with drugs is ineffective
Hey - seems as if my drift on Cholesterol is right on cue. To hear that drug companies in the advertisements are now saying that with small print like this
“In a large clinical study, 3 percent of patients taking a sugar pill or placebo had a heart attack
compared to 2 percent of patients taking Lipitor.”
- HOW DUMB do you have to get to realise that there is no real benefitIt begs the question “why would anyone take a drug like this when it improves results by just 1% over the placebo” - as a scientis that is surely questionable in terms of significance. In terms of money for the drug company its huge - how may read the fine print (if its there at all). We have been using food to reduce cholesterol for over 8 years and guess what it works.
Healthy Mentors - here to help you
Trehalose - the safe sugar
Phil Hughes - HomeopathLast month, I told you about the latest statin shockwave involving Vytorin and the failing grade it received in a recent study evaluating its effectiveness (2/21/08 eTip, subject line: “New recruits”). Not surprisingly, attention quickly shifted to other statins, and the question on the forefront of everyone’s mind — not to mention the cover of Business Week magazine — was “Do cholesterol drugs do any good?”
Now, you read the eTips three times a week, so I’m guessing chances are good that you’re as skeptical as Dr. Wright and I are about patent medications. But, I’ve got to say, the answer to the statin question even surprised me. Thanks to Dr. Wright, I’ve known for years that statins aren’t the miracle workers that Big Pharma makes them out to be. But I had no idea just how inflated that claim really is.
To get a better sense of statins’ effectiveness you have to look beyond the percentages the drug ads are always spouting out. The print ads for the drug claim that it helps reduce heart attack risk by 36 percent. But follow the asterisk next to that number down to the fine print at the bottom of the page and things get a whole lot less impressive. There it says “In a large clinical study, 3 percent of patients taking a sugar pill or placebo had a heart attack compared to 2 percent of patients taking Lipitor.”
Cholesterol - the truth is coming out now
For those of you that read this blog you will know that i have a bone to pick with the medical world who persist in pushing statin drugs to artificially lower cholesterol. They did it to me, or i allowed them to do it to me, for years until i said enough. Slowly bit by bit the real truth is coming out and this article continues that trend. If you are interested in this subject this article is a must read.
The widespread belief that “bad Cholesterol” ( LDL cholesterol) is a major factor driving heart disease — and that cholesterol-lowering drugs like Lipitor and Crestor can protect us against fatal heart attacks — is turning out to be a theory filled with holes. These drugs, which are called “statins,” are the most widely-prescribed pills in the history of human medicine. In 2007 world-wide sales totaled $33 billion. They are particularly popular in the
We thought we knew how they worked. But last month, when Merck/Schering Plough finally released the dismal results of a clinical trial of Zetia, a cholesterol-lowering drug prescribed to about 1 million people, the medical world was stunned. Dr. Steven E. Nissen, chairman of cardiology at the Cleveland Clinic called the findings “shocking.” It turns out that while Zetia does lower cholesterol levels, the study failed to show any measurable medical benefit. This announcement caused both doctors and the mainstream media to take a second look at the received wisdom that “bad cholesterol” plays a major role in causing cardiac disease. A Business Week cover story asked the forbidden question, “Do Cholesterol Drugs Do Any Good?“
The answer, says Dr. Jon Abramson, a clinical instructor at
Finally — and here is the stunner — it turns out we don’t have any clear evidence that statins help the first group by lowering cholesterol levels. It’s true that they do lower cholesterol, but many researchers are no longer convinced that this is what helps patients avoid a second heart attack. It now seems likely that they work by reducing inflammation. In other words, these very expensive drugs seem to do the same thing that aspirin does. (Are they more effective than the humble aspirin? We’ll need head-to-head studies to find out.)
Healthy Mentors - here to help you
cholesterol diabetes diet health heart attack serum lipids cholesterol diabetes diet health heart attack serum lipids
Trehalose - the safe sugar
Phil Hughes - HomeopathSugar and Refined Carbohydrates - make us infertile?
OK - the headline may be a bit extreme but in reading the article below i realised that the truth about sucrose and refined carbohydrate being nutritionally empty is a little short of the mark. It seems that everywhere i turn there are growing bodies of opinion that sucrose or refined carbohydrates are actively damaging our health. One of the areas i have specialised in for 8 years is the nutritional relationship between being able to conceive and being infertile.
Healthy Mentors - here to help you
Trehalose - the safe sugar
Xylitol and Insulin Resistance, Diabetes Hypertension and Hormonal ImbalancesConsuming sugar and other refined carbohydrates results in the rapid release of glucose, or blood sugar. In response, the pancreas secretes insulin to usher glucose into the cells, where it is burned for energy. Excess glucose stresses the system, and over time the cells become less responsive to insulin. This condition, known as insulin resistance, is a huge health problem and it is estimated to affect half the American population. Insulin resistance is associated with abnormalities in cholesterol and triglyceride levels, hypertension, increased risk of heart disease and diabetes (and much more - read on)
(more…)The Greatest Tragedy of All Time
This film was a personal response to our over reliance on the established medical treatments and it expresses some of my personal views. If you want to see more please go to website www.squidoo.com/greatesttragedye mail me
Healthy Mentors - here to help you
Trehalose - the safe sugarToo fat - not fat enough - where is the truth
OK - i am going crazy with this whole thing of overweight/obesity - lets get one thing straight - well several actually.
- Carrying too much fat around our middle puts us at far greater risk of developing cancer, diabetes, heart disease and more.
- being undernourished also damages our health.
- eat the right food, supplement the nutrients that are missing, combat the chemical toxins with antioxidants, exercise
Now Doctors Say Its Good to be Overweight
By David Usborne, The Independent
November 13, 2007
A startling new study by medical researchers in the
The study, published yesterday in the respected Journal of the American Medical Association, runs counter to almost all other advice to consumers by saying that carrying a little extra flab — though not too much — might help people to live longer.
Struggling dieters, used to being told that staying thin is the best prescription for longevity, are likely to be confused this morning if not heartily relieved. While being a bit overweight may indeed increase your chances of dying from diabetes and kidney disease — conditions that are often linked with one another — the same is not true for a host of other ailments including cancer and heart disease, the report suggests.
In fact, scanning the whole gamut of diseases that could curtail your life, being over weight is, on balance, a good thing. The bottom line, the scientists say, is that modestly overweight people demonstrate a lower death rate than their peers who are underweight, obese or — most surprisingly — normal weight.
The findings will be hard to dismiss. They are the result of analysis of decades of data by federal researchers at the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in
Being overweight, the report asserts in its conclusions, “was associated with significantly decreased all-cause mortality overall”.
“The take-home message is that the relationship between fat and mortality is more complicated than we tend to think,” said Katherine Flegal, the lead researcher. “It’s not a cookie-cutter, one-size-fits-all situation where excess weight just increases your mortality risk for any and all causes of death.”
That the CDC has even published the report and thus threatened to muffle years of propaganda as to the health benefits of staying slender has enraged some medical experts.
“It’s just rubbish,” fumed Walter Willett, the professor of epidemiology and nutrition at the Harvard School of Public Health. “It’s just ludicrous to say there is no increased risk of mortality from being overweight.”
Not that the CDC results are an invitation to throw caution to the winds and take cream with everything. The scientists are careful to stress that the benefits they are describing are limited to those people who are merely overweight — which generally means being no more than 30 pounds heavier than is recommended for your height — and certainly do not carry over to those who fall into the category of obese.
Obesity has been declared one of the main threats to health in the
The scientists at the CDC first hinted at the upside of being overweight a few years ago. Since then, however, they have expanded the base of their analysis, with data that includes mortality figures from 2004, the last year for which numbers were available, for no fewer than 2.3 million American adults.
Highlighting how a bit of bulge might help you, the scientists said that in 2004 there were 100,000 fewer deaths among the overweight in the
Aside from escaping diseases, tipping the scales a little further may also help people recover from serious surgery, injuries and infections, Dr Flegal suggested. Such patients may simply have deeper bodily reserves to draw on in times of medical crisis.
Not everyone in the medical profession was surprised or angry about the study. “What this tells us is the hazards have been very much exaggerated,” said Steven Blair, a professor of exercise science and biostatistics at the
“I believe the data,” added Elizabeth Barrett-Connor, a professor of family and preventive medicine at the University of California, San Diego, who believes that a BMI of 25 to 30 — roughly the the so-called overweight range — “may be optimal”.
Critics, however, were quick to point out that the study was concerned with mortality data only and did not take account of the quality of life benefits of keeping your weight down. The study “is not about health and sickness”, noted the obesity researcher Barry Popkin of the
The report “definitely won’t be the last word”, said Dr Michael Thun of the American Cancer Society, who pointed out, in a report released last week by the World Cancer Research Fund and the American Institute for Cancer Research, that staying slim was the main recommendation for avoiding cancer.
Others in the American medical community, while a little bemused, were withholding judgement. “This is a very puzzling disconnect,” said Dr JoAnn Manson, the chief of preventive medicine at Harvard’s Brigham and Women’s Hospital.
The suggestion that a bit of extra weight may assist patients recovering from an infection or surgery was of no surprise to Dr Flegal. “You may also have more lean mass — more bone and muscle,” she said. “If you are in an adverse situation, that could be good for you.”
In their conclusions, the authors of the study note: “Overweight … may be associated with improved survival during recovery from adverse conditions, such as infections or medical procedures, and with improved prognosis for some diseases. Such findings may be due to greater nutritional reserves or higher lean body mass associated with overweight.”
Those of us mostly likely to benefit from a little bulge beneath the belt, the study adds, are between 25 and 59 years old, although there were also some advantages for people over 60.