Archive for September, 2009

“C.A.U.T.I.O.N.”: The Ten Commandments of Cancer Prevention

September 30, 2009 · Filed under Uncategorized · Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

As highlighted by Kenneth Bock, MD, in the foreword of The Unhealthy Truth, “The landscape of children’s health has changed. No longer can we assume that our children will have a healthy childhood – certainly not in the face of the current epidemics of autism, ADHD, asthma and allergies, childhood cancers, childhood obesity and diabetes.”

“There is a growing body of evidence that supports the belief that the increased incidence of these childhood disorders arises from a genetic predisposition coupled with environmental triggers or insults. Environmental insults to which our children are increasingly being exposed include common chemicals (such as PCBs, flame retardants, plasticizers and pesticides), heavy metals (including mercury, lead, arsenic, cadmium and aluminum), countless types of food additives, and an ever increasing number of genetically modified foods. These environmental toxicants can increase oxidative stress, wreaking havoc on cellular functions at all levels.” (The Unhealthy Truth, foreword by Kenneth Bock, MD).

According to the Breast Cancer Fund, one in eight women now has breast cancer. But only 10 percent of those cases can be linked to genetics. In other words, 90 percent of breast cancers being diagnosed today are being triggered by factors in our environment.

The American Cancer Society recognizes the tremendous impact that this is having on our families – physically, emotionally and financially – and developed this simple “C.A.U.T.I.O.N.” reminder to help identify symptoms of the disease so that you can protect the health of your family:

C: Change in bowel or bladder habits

A: A sore that does not heal

U: Unusual bleeding or discharge

T: Thickening or lump in the breast or elsewhere

I: Indigestion or difficulty in swallowing

O: Obvious change in a wart or mole

N: Nagging cough or hoarseness

As highlighted in Premium Health, the 10 commandments of cancer prevention are:

1. Avoid tobacco in all its forms, including exposure to secondhand smoke.

2. Eat properly and try to reduce your consumption of saturated fat and red meat, which appears to increase the risk of colon and prostate cancers, while increasing your consumption of fruits, vegetables, and whole grains.

3. Exercise regularly.

4. Stay lean. Obesity increases the risk of many forms of cancer.

5. Limit alcohol to one to two drinks a day.

6. Avoid unnecessary exposure to radiation.

7. Avoid exposure to industrial and environmental toxins such as asbestos fibers, benzene, aromatic amines, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).

8. Avoid infections that contribute to cancer, including hepatitis viruses, HIV, and the human papillomavirus.

9. Consider taking low-dose aspirin (men at the highest risk of prostate and colon cancer tend to reap the greatest benefits).

10. Get enough vitamin D. Although protection is far from proven, evidence suggests that vitamin D may help reduce the risk of prostate cancer, colon cancer, and other malignancies.

As always, prevention is the best medicine.

Source: The Unhealthy Truth: How Our Food Is Making Us Sick and What We Can Do About It (Random House, May 2009) and The Ten Commandments of Cancer Prevention, courtesy of Premium Health News Service

Comments (1) »

Healing the Tummy: Looking Underneath the Yogurt Label

September 29, 2009 · Filed under Uncategorized · Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

As headlines swirl about who-knows-what being found in our food supply, another ingredient continues to make the news: probiotics. PRObiotics are increasingly added to the food supply to help replace what the ANTIbiotics are taking away: health-promoting bacteria, the healthy little critters in our digestive tracts that are essential to the digestive process.

In today’s New York Times, Tara Parker Pope highlights the increasing use of these PRObiotics in our food supply. In her smart column, she suggests that Buyer Beware: plenty of manufacturers appear to be exploiting the increasing popularity of these ingredients, as a way to promote their products. Parker Pope then gives smart tips and savvy insight into ways that you can navigate the yogurt aisle (where probiotics are most commonly found), for those of you making a concerted effort to address the growing health impact that ANTIbiotics in our food appear to be having on our health.

Looking Underneath the Yogurt Label

Looking Underneath the Yogurt Label

Looking Underneath the Yogurt Label is a smart read for those wanting to do more for their health without damaging their pocketbooks and for those hoping to understand the role that PRObiotics play in addressing the ANTIbiotics in our food supply.

Leave a comment »

Could Gut Worms Protect Against Asthma?

September 28, 2009 · Filed under Uncategorized · Tagged , , , , , ,

Thank you to our friends in the UK for highlighting this interesting (albeit a bit disgusting!) article from the BBC:
Gut Worms Protect Against Allergy

Is it the worm or the diet?

Is it the worm or the diet?

This study is interesting in that it analyzes the role that gut worms play in digestive health, something rarely discussed here in the US, but insightful nonetheless. However, in addressing this in isolation, it fails to acknowledge and analyze the role that dietary factors play in the immune system of these children.

An analysis of the diet consumed in these countries and the role that processed v. unprocessed foods play in the gut health of these children would be an interesting parallel to his rather graphic picture in an effort to learn the whole truth behind what is compromising our health and the health of our children.

Leave a comment »

Disease-Driven Earnings: Is It Time for A New Prescription for “Generation Rx”?

September 9, 2009 · Filed under Uncategorized

Today’s headlines are enough to make any mother wary. As we battle our toddlers in the grocery store, we hardly have the energy left to decipher the headlines: Organics aren’t healthier, death panels await health care reform, bankers receive record bonuses, swine flu pandemics swirl . What has happened to the world that our children are inheriting? And does anyone care?

Perhaps we should. Because the children of today represent the economy of tomorrow. Today’s parents and grandparents are raising the “think tanks” that are going to be the solutions to tomorrow’s problems . Today’s children will reinvent energy technology, redefine reform and regulations and enhance agricultural productivity in ways that we can not even begin to imagine. But only if we give them the tools with which to do it.

Obama insisting on school and education, with the support of Laura Bush, is a start. But more fundamentally, what about health? Today, 1 in 3 American children now has autism, allergies, ADHD or asthma. 90% of the worlds ADHD medications are prescribed to the American kids, while the US only represent 5% of the world’s population. According to MSNBC, sales of EpiPens are up, while test scores are down. And according to the Centers for Disease Control, 1 in 2 African American kids and 1 in 3 Caucasian kids born in the year 2000 (that is this year’s 4th Graders) will be insulin dependent by the time they reach adulthood.

And while Kraft, Coca Cola and Wal-Mart formulate their products differently for children overseas (with reduced fat, salt and synthetic ingredient content), our National School Lunch Program continues to be a dumping ground for the remnants of the agrichemical corporations who are unable to dispose of their technology laced corn and soy in grocery stores, restaurants or to the livestock industry. And while we allocate $600 billion to the Pentagon in 2009, we only allocated $9 billion to the National School Lunch Program and a meager $2.4 billion to the FDA.

And we wonder why our children have earned the title “Generation Rx” or why our economy is heaving under the burden of health care costs.

According to the World Health Organization, the US ranks 37th out of 40 countries (on par with Slovenia) in terms of “health care”. According to the American Cancer Society, the US has the highest rate of cancer of any country in the world, with migration studies showing that if you are to move here from somewhere like Japan, your likelihood of developing cancer increases four-fold.

We’ve done a lousy job of preventing illness in our country. And while that’s been good for Big Pharma, the costs being born by the majority of American citizens now far outweigh the benefits being reaped by a few corporate ones.

As we watch family members suffer from diabetes, cancers and asthma, it begs the question: Why? Why are these conditions often referred to as “American epidemics” in international publications like The Economist? Why does health care spending consume over 16% of our economy here in the US, while its associated economic burden in France is closer to 8%? Why does Starbucks spend more on health care than it does on coffee?

The reasons? There are many. But perhaps the most differentiating is that in our country, sickness sells. With Money Driven Medicine, there is little incentive to prevent illness. Sickness is good for business. Disease enhances earnings. So if the processed food we buy in Aisle 9 contains ingredients linked to hyperactivity in children, then rather than ban the use of that synthetic ingredient and insist on the use of a more natural alternative, as countries around the world have done, we simply have to walk a few aisles over in the grocery store to pick up our ADHD medicines from Aisle 2.

And our economy hums along. Or does it?

In 1946, Harry Truman said, “A nation is only as healthy as its children”. And 50 years ago, we paid close heed, reaping the rewards of today’s Bill Gates and Meg Whitmans. Thirty years ago, we were still paying attention, as evidenced by today’s Mark Zuckerbergs and Sergey Brins.

But what about tomorrow? Given that our future productivity, economic viability and financial stability are contingent on the health of today’s children, perhaps we should pause and consider the seeds that we are sowing with “Generation Rx” .

And if you are inclined, you can Do Something about it and be part of the solution.

Comments (3) »

New Video: First Lady Michelle Obama and Sam Kass Tell The Story of the White House Kitchen Garden

September 7, 2009 · Filed under Uncategorized

The riveting, true veggie-tale of the shallots heard ’round the world…

http://video.aol.com/aolvideo/AOL News/white-house-kitchen-garden/36057395001

“The garden is really an important introduction to what I hope will be a new way to how the country thinks about food…and I also want to encourage people to think about doing more family meals,” Mrs. Obama says. “We’ve found that we’ve been able to do that, and part of the message is that if the President of the United States can sit down with his family and have dinner, hopefully more families find the time to do the same thing.”

Leave a comment »

Perspective on the Benefits of Organic Foods

September 7, 2009 · Filed under Uncategorized · Tagged , , , , , , ,

This Hot Topic was developed by the Hunger and Environmental Nutrition DPG and is a reflection of the expertise and opinion of HEN DPG members. Hot Topics are short, concise practice and science-based answers to current questions RDs and DTRs may receive. Hot Topics are not an ADA position or stance on a topic and does not reflect Association consensus on the issue. Rather, they provide expert opinion to an emerging area of food, nutrition and health. Hot Topics are meant to assist RDs and DTRs in answers questions of patients/clients and the media. Date of Release: September 2009.

Available at:

http://www.eatright.org/cps/rde/xchg/ada/hs.xsl/nutrition_22637_ENU_HTML.htm

Claim of Topic:
Registered dietitians (RDs) and dietetic technicians (DTRs), registered should fully understand all of the factors consumers must grapple with when making the choice to purchase organic foods, as well as to support future research that will further clarify the differences and costs associated with organically versus conventionally produced foods.

Organic foods are increasing their presence in the marketplace. According to a 2009 Organic Trade Association survey, sales of organic food in the US have grown by almost 16 percent in 2008 over 2007, totaling $22.9 billion in 2008 sales; 3.5 percent of all US food sales (1). These foods are produced following practices described in the USDA National Organic Program (NOP), a marketing program with a certification process throughout the production and manufacturing chain (2). The NOP describes the practices that are required for labeling a product “organic,” but it does not address nutritional benefits or food safety issues (2).

Organic foods are generally more expensive in the marketplace than conventional foods, due in part to their smaller production scale and higher labor costs (3). However, organic produce purchased in-season is usually comparable in price to conventional produce (4). In addition, community supported agriculture programs can provide low-income consumers with access to fresh, organic produce that may be difficult to find in some urban locations (5). Research also shows consumers are willing to pay a price premium for some organic food products in the marketplace, including certain fruits and vegetables (6).

When considering benefits and costs of organic versus conventional agricultural production, it is important to consider benefits and costs to consumers, farmers, communities and the environment (3, 7, 8). For example, current research in numerous areas is showing both short-and long-term benefits to our population and the planet with organic and other sustainable production systems. Documented environmental benefits of organic production systems include reduced nutrient pollution, improved soil organic matter, lower energy use, reduced pesticide residues in food and water and enhanced biodiversity (3).

Whether or not organically produced foods are more nutritious than their conventionally produced counterparts is the subject of an ongoing debate. One recent review of the nutritional quality of organically versus conventionally produced food reported organically produced plant products contained more dry matter and some minerals (iron, magnesium) and more antioxidants such as phenols and salicylic acid than conventionally produced plant products(9). In contrast, a recent systematic review found no evidence of a difference in nutrient quality between organically and conventionally produced food, except for nitrogen (which was significantly higher in conventionally produced crops) and phosphorus and titratable acidity or ripeness at harvest (which were significantly higher in organically produced crops) (10). In this systematic review, the authors did not examine differences in contaminants (such as pesticide, herbicide or fungicide residues) or the possible environmental consequences of organic versus conventional production practices (10).

Discussion of Topic:
Consumers report cost, health and environmental concerns as factors in considering their decision to purchase foods labeled organic (1, 11). In juxtaposition to conventional foods, there are a variety of reasons why organic foods can be considered as facilitating the creation of a healthful, sustainable food system.
1. Some organic fruits, vegetables and juices may contain more phytochemicals (e.g., antioxidants and polyphenols) compared to their conventionally grown counterparts (9, 12-17). However, researchers are still debating from both sides (pro and con) of any potential nutritional advantages of consuming organic versus conventional fruits and vegetables and other plant products (9, 10, 12-18). As with all research, it is important to understand and question the methodology of any study and not draw broad conclusions from limited or incomparable data.
2. Organic meat may reduce the development of human antibiotic resistance and lessen air and water pollution (19).
3. In an ongoing cohort study, consumption of organic dairy products was associated with a lower risk of eczema during the first two years of life (20). The authors hypothesize “a high intake of omega-3 fatty acids and/or conjugated linoleic acids from organic dairy products by the child is protective against eczema (independent of atopy) and that also the mother’s intake of these fatty acids during pregnancy and lactation contributes to this protection” (20). One proposed mechanism to explain this association is the production of biologically active compounds and processes of intra-cellular signaling, since it is typical for molecules participating in processes of intra-cellular signaling to be present in very small amounts (21). Additional research is needed in this area (20, 21).
4. Organic agriculture offers numerous opportunities to reduce exposure to agricultural pesticides through the food and water supply (3), which may be detrimental to human health, particularly for high-risk groups such as pregnant women, infants, young children and farm worker households (22-27).
5. Organically cultivated foods can promote a more sustainable food system by reducing soil erosion and rehabilitating poor soils (7, 28). Many components of organic agriculture can be implemented within other sustainable farming systems (7).
6. Organic agriculture can integrate small- to medium-size farmers into high-value food chains/markets (7). Increasingly, larger farms and international producers have entered the organic marketplace; even so, the smallest organic farms have been able to maintain a stable share of the organic foods sector (3).
7. Organic agriculture has other documented heightened environmental services than conventional agriculture, including pollination services (29). Many agricultural food crops are dependent on pollination services provided by insects and other animals including birds. In contrast, synthetic pesticides used in agricultural production may negatively affect insects and other animals that are pollinators of food plants (28).
8. Organic agricultural systems offer multiple opportunities to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions and counteract global warming (7). Organic agriculture significantly lowers energy requirements for agricultural production systems compared to industrial agriculture (3, 7, 8). Long-term field experiments document that organic matter is higher in organically managed soil than in conventionally managed soil (7, 30). Humus (the well-decomposed part of soil organic matter) helps mitigate climate change by sequestering carbon and acting as a sink (e.g., by removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and fixing it in the soil) (7).
9. Biodiversity is enhanced in organic agricultural systems (3, 7, 28), which makes these farms more resilient to unpredictable weather patterns and pest outbreaks (7), as is predicted with climate change (31).

Bottom Line:
As shown above, the decision to choose organic products is influenced by many issues, including cost, health and environmental concerns. How to make sense of all the research and help consumers should be one of the roles of the RD and DTR. While there is still more work to be done, current research indicates there can be initial and long-term positive impacts on the health of individuals and the environment from the adoption of large-scale organic farming and food consumption. However, the potential of organic agriculture to improve the environmental performance of United States agriculture is having only a modest impact on the environment because the current organic adoption rate is low (3). Such that, the 2008 Food, Conservation and Energy Act (2008 Farm Bill) included increased “funding to help producers and handlers with organic certification costs, to enhance data collection on organic agriculture and to support Federal organic regulatory activities.”

The USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service also administers several different grant programs, which have assisted a number of different local, organic initiatives across the US (3). “Public investment in organic agriculture facilitates wider access to organic food for consumers and helps farmers capture high-value markets and boost farm income, as well as conserve nonrenewable natural resources and protect US soil and water.” (3).

Resources/References:
1. Organic Trade Association’s 2009 Organic Industry Survey. May 2009. Greenfield, MA: Organic Trade Association. Available at: www.ota.org/. Accessed on July 1, 2009.
2. National Organic Program (NOP). Organic Production and Handling Standards. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Agricultural Marketing Service. October 2002 (Updated April 2008). Available at: www.ams.usda.gov/nop. Accessed July 25, 2009.
3. Greene C, Dimitri C, Lin Biing-Hwan, McBride W, Oberholtzer L, Smith T. Emerging Issues in the US Organic Industry. Economic Information Bulletin Number 55. Washington DC: United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service; June 2009; 28 pages.
4. Mills LS. From local chow to green machines: ADA members are turning foodservice into eco-friendly operations. ADA Times. January/February 2008:12-17.
5. Forbes CB, Harmon AH. Buying into community supported agriculture: strategies for overcoming income barriers. J Hunger Environ Nutr. 2007;2:65-80.
6. Smith TA, Lin B-H. Consumers willing to pay a price premium for organic produce. Amber Waves. Washington, DC: USDA, Economic Research Service. March 2009.
7. Niggli U, FlieBbach A, Hepperly P. Scialabba N. Low Greenhouse Gas Agriculture: Mitigation and Adaptation Potential of Sustainable Farming Systems. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO); April 2009. Available at: ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/010/ai781e/ai781e00.pdf. Accessed June 29, 2009.
8. Ziesemer J. Energy Use in Organic Food Systems. Natural Resources Management and Environment Department, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Rome, Italy: FAO, August 2007. Available at: www.fao.org/docs/eims/upload/233069/energy-use-oa.pdf. Accessed July 3, 2009.
9. Lairon D. Nutritional quality and safety of organic food. A review. Agron Sustain Dev. 2009;DOI: 10.10151/agro/2009019
10. Dangour AD, Dodhia SK, Hayter A, Allen E, Lock K, Uauy R. Nutritional quality of organic foods: a systematic review. Am J Clin Nutr. 2009;DOI: 10.3945/ajcn.2009.28041
11. 2009 US Families’ Organic Attitudes & Beliefs Study. Executive Summary. A Joint Project of Organic Trade Association and KIWI Magazine. Conducted by RMI Research and Consulting, LLC. Greenfield, MA: Organic Trade Association. June 2009. Available at: www.ota.org/. Accessed July 1, 2009.
12. Strackle BA, Rufer C, Weibel FP, Bub A, Watzl B. Three-year comparison of the polyphenol content and antioxidant capacities in organically and conventionally produced apples (Malus domestica Bork. Cultivar ‘Golden Delicious’). J Agric. Food Chem. 2009;57:4598-4605.
13. Benbrook C. The impacts of yield on nutritional quality: lessons from organic farming. Hort Science. 2009;44:12-14.
14. Wang SY, Chen C-T, Sciarappa W, Wang CY, Camp MJ. Fruit quality, antioxidant capacity and flavonoid content of organically and conventionally grown blueberries. J Agric Food Chem. 2008;56: 5788-5794.
15. Dani C, Oliboni LS, Vanderlinde R, Bonatto D, Salvador M, Henriques JA. Phenolic content and antioxidant activities of white and purple grape juices manufactured with organically or conventionally produced grapes. Food Chem Toxicol. 2007;45:2574-80.
16. Mitchell AE, Hong Y-J, Koh E, Barrett DM, Bryant DE, Denison RF, Kaffka S. Ten year comparison of the influence of organic and conventional crop management on the content of flavonoids in tomatoes. J Agric Food Chem. 2007;55:6154-6159.
17. Olsson ME, Andersson CS, Oredsson S, Berglund RH, Gustavsson KE. Antioxidant levels and inhibition of cancer cell proliferation in vitro by extracts from organically and conventionally cultivated strawberries. J Agri Food Chem. 2006;54:1248-1255.
18. Magkos F, Arvanitia F, Zampelas A. Organic food: nutritious food or food for thought? A review of the evidence. Int J Food Sci Nutr. 2003;54:357-371.
19. American Medical Association (AMA). Report of the Council on Science and Public Health (CSAPH). CSAPH Report 8-A-09. Sustainable Food, Resolution 405, A-08.2008. Available at: www.ama-assn.org/ama1/pub/upload/mm/475/refcomd.pdf Accessed on June 20, 2009.
20. Kummeling I, Thijs C. Huber, M, van de Vijver LPL, Snijders BEP, Penders J, Stelma F, van Ree R, van den Brandt, PA, Dagnelie PC. Consumption of organic food and risk of atopic disease during the first 2 years of life in the Netherlands. Br J Nutr. 2008;99:598-605.
21. Rist L, Mueller A, Barthel C, Snijders B, Jansen M, Simoes-Wust AP, Huber M, Kummeling I, von Mandach U, Steinhart H, Thijs C. Influence of organic diet on the amount of conjugated linoleic acids in breast milk of lactating women in the Netherlands. Br J Nutr. 2007;97:735-743.
22. Huen K, Harley K, Brooks J, Hubbard A, Bradman A, Eskenazi B, Holland N. Developmental changes in PON1 enzyme activity in young children and effects on PON1 polymorphisms. Environ Health Perspect. 2009; DOI: 10.1289/ehp.0900870
23. Lu C, Barr DB, Pearson MA, Waller LA. Dietary intake and its contribution to longitudinal pesticide exposure in urban/suburban children. Environ Health Perspect. 2008;116:537-542.
24. Arcury T, Grzywacz, Barr D, Tapia J, Chen H, Quandt S. Pesticide urinary metabolites levels of children in Eastern North Carolina farmworker households. Environ Health Perspect. 2007;115:1254-1260.
25. Lu C, Toepkel K, Irish R, Fenske RA, Barr DB, Bravo R. Organic diets significantly lower children’s dietary exposure to organophosphorus pesticides. Environ Health Perspect. 2006;114:260-63.
26. Furlong CE, Holland N, Richer R, Bradman A, Ho A, Eskenazi B. PON1 status of farmworker mothers and children as a predictor of organophosphate sensitivity. Pharmacogenet Genomics. 2006;16:183-90.
27. Curl C, Fenske RA. Elgthun K. Organophosphorus pesticide exposure of urban and suburban preschool children with organic and conventional diets. Environ Health Perspect. 2003;111:377-382.
28. Harmon, AH, Gerald, BL. Position of the American Dietetic Association: Food and Nutrition Professionals Can Implement Practices to Conserve Natural Resources and Support Ecological Sustainability. J Am Diet Assoc. 2007;107:1033-1043.
29. Sandu HS, Wratten, SD, Cullen R, Case B. The future of farming: the value of ecosystem services in conventional and organic arable land: an experimental approach. Ecological Economics. 2008;64:835-848.
30. Marriott EE, Wander MM. Total and liable soil organic matter in organic and conventional farming systems. Soil Science Society of America Journal. 2006;70:950-959.
31. Worldwatch Institute. Questions and Answers about Global Warming and Abrupt Climate Change. Available at: www.worldwatch.org/node/3949. Accessed on July 26, 2009.

Written by Christine McCullum-Gomez, PhD, RD and Anne-Marie Scott, PhD, RD of the Hunger and Environmental Nutrition Dietetic Practice Group.

Leave a comment »