Fructose Raises Blood Pressure (two very current July 2010 studies)

Dr Mercola’s post this week cites a very current scientific study and states (quote): “People who eat a diet high in fructose are at increased risk of developing high blood pressure, or hypertension. The results of a study suggest that cutting back on foods and beverages containing a lot of fructose might decrease your risk of developing hypertension.  Hypertension is a major risk factor for heart and kidney diseases. An increase in the general consumption of fructose, which is used to sweeten a wide variety of processed foods, has occurred at the same time as a rise in the prevalence of hypertension. [please note this is not HFCS – but pure fructose – the white granulated powder which is even worse than HFCS]

 "The study involved 4,528 US adults 18 years of age or older with no prior history of hypertension. Study participants answered questions related to their consumption of foods and beverages such as fruit juices, soft drinks, bakery products, and candy." The above article is a thought-provoking one if you wish to read it. Too many studies and top scientists are exposing this poison to ignore it – Read more....

Another New Study on Fructose & Hypertension

Dr Briffa, a specialist surgeon in London who is also a nutrition expert, mentions a scientific study presented this week at the American Heart Association’s High Blood Pressure Research Conference in Chicago, USA.  The study showed how blood pressure, blood fats, blood sugar, insulin levels and triglycerides all rose on fructose, and healthy HDL levels dropped all in just 2 weeks. The researchers concluded: “The study demonstrates that fructose poses significant hazards for health” - see Fructose Raises Blood Pressure. Fructose is slow poison, nobody needs it! [Perez-Pozo S, et al “Excessive fructose intake raises blood pressure in humans” AHA Blood Pressure Research Conference 2009; Abstract P127.] NB: For a great article on the dangers of fructose this month, also see Dr Mercola’s excellent article Fructose is Fructose! Click here

Newsflash! Regular use of fish oil supplements, which contain high levels of the omega-3 fats EPA and DHA, was linked with a 32% reduced risk of breast cancer. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention July 2010;19(7):1696-708

The BEST WHEY is here!

At last we have our high-quality New Zealand whey protein isolate available in unflavoured or chocolate flavour, at a great price. For the quality you receive from this pristine, superior whey protein isolate, and the assurance that it has no pesticides or hormones – we know our The Best Whey by Nourishing Solutions, is the best: 200g & 400g sizes available. Whey protein has a host of health benefits, including:

        ·   Powerful immune support
        ·   Outstanding source of pure protein
        ·   Supports beneficial gut bacteria
        ·   Promotes muscle strength, endurance & recovery - excellent for athletes
        ·   Great for Blood sugar control, diabetics and weight loss
        ·   Supports the body's optimal metabolic rate and promotes fat burning

Protein enables the body to build and to repair itself.  Whey is good especially in a smoothie with a few berries to balance the carbs, protein and fat which keeps you full longer, and build muscle not fat.  It also keeps your blood sugar levels stable for many, many hours!  Here’s my recipe:

What you need:
500-700ml or more of distilled water             2-4 scoops of The Best Whey
1 small banana                                             1-2 punnets any kind of berries
1 teaspoon Nutrition Solutions Scorbi-Cee (for extra Vitamin C)

Optional:
sometimes we add stevia or xylitol if the fruit is not that sweet, or you could add in some yogurt, goji berries or oats, MSM powder etc – do whatever grabs your fancy! Blend and enjoy.

The China Study – Real Science…??
People often ask me about my thoughts on the China Study, as more people are becoming disillusioned by it - so I’ve put together a ‘collage’ here of some current information. These are not my thoughts, but selected quotes by experts whose comments most often mirror my own on the subject. Follow the recommended links for more. My comments are in blue italics throughout this section. I start with data by Anthony Colpo from http://anthonycolpo.com/?p=129 (July 11, 2010)

“This update + original article was originally posted at TheGreatCholesterolCon.com, September 2, 2007
I have read a lot of truly awful health and diet books in my time, but without question, one of the very worst was The China Study by T. Colin Campbell. Never have I read a book so audaciously misleading, one whose author pontificates so vigorously about the importance of the scientific method but then unabashedly proceeds to write page after page of scientifically untenable garbage“

“I read Campbell’s The China Study in early 2006. Given my extremely low tolerance for [expletive omitted], it was a painful endeavor, but I soldiered through, shaking my head in both amazement and disgust the whole time.” (An interesting article by Colpo follows on the site here.)“Campbell has not refuted a single point I made in my article. Not one.” He continues: “He then proceeds with some rather impotent remarks that also do nothing whatsoever to explain why he wrote the misleading rot that comprises so much of The China Study.

• Why does Campbell dump on protein incessantly but fail to mention the research demonstrating the great potential value of whey protein? If he is the protein expert he repeatedly portrays himself to be, he should be well aware of this research.
   

• Why did Campbell claim that Dr Lester Morrison’s successful heart disease trial showed the value of a low-protein diet, when the participants did not eat a low-protein diet? Morrison himself described it as a high-protein diet!
   

• Why did Campbell claim that “There are virtually no nutrients in animal-based foods that are not better provided by plants.”? As my article clearly explains, this claim is so absurd as to be laughable.”

Colpo notes: “Campbell repeatedly pooh-poohs nutritional supplements, insisting they are of little to no value when it comes to improving health and fighting disease. I agree that healthy eating habits should form the foundation of one’s dietary arsenal against disease, but to denigrate nutritional supplements as largely useless is downright wrong.” (Colpo cites many studies then of outstanding results with supplements.) Gee, I found it interesting that Campbell later contradicts himself by suggesting B12 supplements (which comes from meat), fish oil supplements (in spite of his “no protein” stance – this comes from fish), Vitamin D supplements and zinc; so, um….. supplements are ok when it suits him?!
 

“On page 230, Campbell states in bold type: “There are virtually no nutrients in animal-based foods that are not better provided by plants.” Clearly, Campbell knows little about the nutritional content of animal foods. Animal flesh contains many nutrients that are either found in scarce amounts or entirely absent from plant foods.” He then lists pages of these, their relevance and lack of them in the plant kingdom – please read the article, no space here.
 

“Despite it’s title, only a small portion of The China Study is actually devoted to discussing the giant epidemiological study of the same name; the rest of the book simply reads like an extended sales brochure for veganism.”  “According to Campbell, the China Study data showed that: “People who ate the most animal-based foods got the most chronic disease. . . . People who ate the most plant-based foods were the healthiest and tended to avoid chronic disease.”[p.7] In reality, the China Study showed nothing of the sort! The China Study does not contain the actual data gathered from its namesake study. So when Campbell claims that the China Study found a consistent relationship between animal foods and various diseases, readers have no way of verifying this information for themselves.”
 

If this is indeed the poor science it appears to be, you owe it to yourself to find out the truth.  Don’t be a sheep following someone blindly out of misplaced loyalty or ignorance – find out for yourself. Truth sets you free. Colpo continues with a comprehensive article on the flaws in the book (which are overwhelming), including Campbell’s rebuttal (serious personal character attacks on his opponents). The groundswell of people becoming disenchanted with the inaccuracies of this book is on the rise.  One such person has done a lot of research in order to expose this book - her name is Denise Minger, and you can read her very interesting findings starting with Denise Minger Refutes the China Study Once and For All.  Please remember I’m personally in a search for truth, and not on a witch hunt!  Truth is everything to me, so that I can be of help to others not lead them astray. If we choose to believe a lie we delude & deceive ourselves and sadly many others in the process.

One quote about Denise says: “Denise got hold of the raw study data and took it apart with a fine-toothed comb. And what she found is that the claims Campbell made in his China Study book are not supported by the data. She also found important data points Campbell never bothered to mention in the book because they didn’t support his vegan agenda. For example, Campbell conveniently fails to mention the county of Tuoli in China. The folks in Tuoli ate 45% of their diet as fat, 134 grams of animal protein each day (twice as much as the average American), and rarely ate vegetables or other plant foods. Yet, according to the China Study data, they were extremely healthy with low rates of cancer and heart disease; healthier, in fact, than many of the counties that were nearly vegan.

This is just one of many cases of the selective citation and data cherry picking Campbell employs in the China Study. Denise’s critique masterfully reveals the danger of drawing conclusions from epidemiological studies, which can only show correlations between variables – not causal relationships. Campbell should be well aware of this. After all, in his book he rails against the nutritional bias rampant in the scientific community. Yet nowhere is such bias more evident than in Campbell’s own interpretation of the China Study data.”

Another quote: "You might also want to check out this debate between T. Colin Campbell and Loren Cordain on human protein requirements. Notice that Cordain’s articles contain 164 citations of research studies. How many references do Campbell’s articles contain? Zero! And Campbell’s typical “I’m more educated than the other guy” won’t fly here. Dr. Cordain has some serious chops”.

Do your own research - some good sites and arguments here which make fascinating reading.

http://www.westonaprice.org/blogs/denise-minger-refutes-the-china-study-once-and-for-all.htmlhttp://anthonycolpo.com/?p=129 read to the end
http://thehealthyskeptic.org/rest-in-peace-china-study
http://freetheanimal.com/2010/07/t-colin-campbells-the-china-study-finally-exhaustively-discredited.html
http://freetheanimal.com/2010/07/the-china-study-smackdown-roundup.html

Truth persuades by teaching - but does not teach by persuading – Quintus Septimus Tertullianus (160-230AD)