Tuesday, September 29, 2009

More Cancer Than Ever and I Know Why, but the American Cancer Society Doesn't...

Ok, so I go to check my e-mail yesterday and new guidelines were published by the American Institute for Cancer Research. There were actually eight which I will get to in a minute. It's important that you read the article in its entirety (it's not too long), so I copied and pasted it below. Please note, I added the italics;

'Can diet make a difference? The links between cancer prevention and specific dietary patterns are still pretty murky. Even people with extensive health knowledge, who seem to get everything right, get cancer. We know there are some things we can’t control. We can’t change risk factors like our family history. But it’s clear that eating well is part of doing everything you can to tip the odds in your favor-and the best benefit is knowing that you’re doing what you can to promote overall good health.

A well-nourished, well-rested body is the best nutritional strategy for keeping your immune system strong. Eat a variety of foods that provide a natural abundance of vitamins, minerals and phytonutrients, particularly those rich in vitamin C, vitamin E, beta carotene and selenium, antioxidants that, according to some studies, may help prevent disease, including some cancers. These healthy recipes will get you started-they all contain at least 15 percent daily value of at least one of those vitamins or minerals.'

I'll post the eight suggestions after we analyze the above paragraphs. First off, I have no problem with the second paragraph and I agree with everything being said. The problem lies in the italicized part of paragraph one, repasted below;

'The links between cancer prevention and specific dietary patterns are still pretty murky. Even people with extensive health knowledge, who seem to get everything right, get cancer.'

The links between dietary patterns and cancer is not murky. I repeat, it is not murky. We have study after study showing that the more sugar one is exposed to, the greater one's risk for cancer. The problem becomes 'murky' when the researchers do not understand that sugar is sugar is sugar. These same supposed 'experts' in their field just don't get that glucose from a carrot, tomato or corn, is the same glucose molecule as is found in a snickers bar or a piece of cake.

Our cells have no way of knowing where the glucose molecule came from, they just react as they react. In my book in my Cancer-Carb connection Chapter, I outline the facts that when we eat sugar, our pancreas will secrete insulin. Insulin works via a second messenger system to get glucose inside the cell. This second messenger system will release known cancer causing substances which can turn on cancer genes and helps already existing cancer to spread.

This is a fact and it scares the heck out of me whenever I see a guideline stating we need to eat more fruit and whole grains to lower our cancer risk. Now fruit contains the sugar fructose which does not require insulin to get into the cell. Having said this, ask any diabetic what happens to their blood 'glucose' whenever they eat fruit and they will tell you their blood 'glucose' rises. Now insulin will be secreted and the second messenger with the subsequent release of cancer causing substances comes into play.

Whole grains will simply supply glucose and stimulate insulin secretion and you now know the rest. Here are the 8 Guidelines and my comments, in italics, will immediately follow each tip;

'The American Institute for Cancer Research just published its most up-to-date food, nutrition and activity recommendations to help prevent cancer.'

Here are eight quick tips from the report:

1)Be as lean as possible without becoming underweight.

We should actually be a little heavier than the actuarial tables suggest. While being lean is certainly appealing, research has shown that a little extra weight may be quite beneficial, especially as we get older. This is referred to as 'insurance weight.' The point is that if we get sick, having a little extra weight will provide a physiological reserve of energy to help us get better quicker. A person who is lean has no reserve to dip into and instead will dip into muscle and bone for energy, thereby suppressing the immunological system and places the person at risk for a longer recovery.

2)Be physically active for at least 30 minutes every day.

I would change this to maybe 4-5x a week. Too much exercise puts the body in stress mode where cortisol may be secreted in larger quantities. One of the things cortisol does is to tell the liver to make sugar. This will cause an insulin release with subsequent turning on of the second messenger system (among many other things.)

3) Avoid sugary drinks. Limit consumption of energy-dense foods (particularly processed foods high in added sugar, or low in fiber, or high in fat).

I agree with most of this, with the exception of the fat. Certainly avoid the sugars; foods low in fiber tend to be high in carbs and sugar; we need to be eating more saturated fat not less. Increased saturated fat consumption has never been shown to increase one's risk for cancer. We actually have studies, the results which were never reported, that increased saturated fat consumption lowered women's risk for breast cancer. Let me also add that trans fats, that is the margarines and a whole host of other foods, does increase one's risk for not only heart disease, but cancer as well. Also, a new fat has arrived on the scene. It goes by the name of interesterified fatty acids, which some researchers say is more dangerous than trans fats.

4)Eat more of a variety of vegetables, fruits, whole grains and legumes, such as beans.

Stay away from carb dense veggies like carrots, corn (really a fruit), tomatoes, potatoes (of any color), I just found out that artichokes are loaded with carbs as well; avoid fruit of any kind; whole grains we now know are very bad for us due to the increased carb count found in these foods;legumes can be sugar dense so you'll need to research the carb amount for what you're eating; and lastly beans do have a good amount of carbs, but usually have a good amount of fiber so the effect of the carbs is neutralized. The other thing about beans is that they contain a sugar known as stachyose, which we cant digest that well and this is what leads to the whole flatulence problem with beans.

5)Limit consumption of red meats (such as beef, pork and lamb) and avoid processed meats.

Absolutely, one-hundred percent false!!!! Eat as much of these foods as you can. They provide our bodies with cholesterol, fat and protein and help lower our risk for heart disease, obesity, type 2 diabetes and CANCER!!!! Eat only those meats where no hormones, antibiotics or other growth enhancers were used. Do not eat lean meats. You want the fat. As a side note, most doctors, nutritionists and dietitians think the fat in meats is predominantly saturated. This is false. Beef fat is 55% unsaturated; Pork fat (or lard) is 65% unsaturated; and chicken/turkey fat is 80% unsaturated. So the fat from meat is more unsaturated than saturated. Oops, I guess the powers to be got that wrong too.
Oh yeah, I do agree to avoid processed meats, but their actually safer for you than fruits and whole grains--pretty wild, Huh?

6)If alcohol is consumed at all, limit alcoholic drinks to two for men and one for women a day.

I thought it was 2-3 for men and 1-2 for women. This is referred to as moderate drinking and can cut your heart disease risk by 38%--no joke.

7)Limit consumption of salty foods and foods processed with salt (sodium).

I agree, but remember salt only becomes an issue when large amounts of insulin are secreted, which occurs when we eat too many carbs.

8)Don't use supplements to protect against cancer.

I totally disagree on this one. The only reason we see conflicting results when we look at antioxidants and cancer is that the researchers are feeding the participants more whole grains, fruits and carb dense veggies. This throws a monkey wrench into the whole study and makes the researchers think antioxidants weren't effective; when indeed what was happening was the carb dense alleged 'healthy foods' were increasing the cancer rates. Use antioxidants--they protect us against cancer, help us improve our energy level, and are good as anti-aging defenses. I take 'em and you should too. If interested, Click Here to see my Optimum Health web-site and all the Nutraceuticals I promote.

So, from my comments above, we can easily see why 'Even people with extensive health knowledge, who seem to get everything right, get cancer.'
That's because they are being given the wrong dietary information and this is why they are getting cancer (excluding, of course, people who are exposed to environmental things like smoking, too much alcohol or job related exposures).

Dr Jim

Just want to say hello to Carol, my 7th follower; who will be number 8?

A quick message to my readers. If you live in NYC, any of the 5 Burroughs, Westchester County or Long Island, listen to 620 on your AM dial, this Saturday from 9-10 AM where I am a featured guest and will be discussing the childhood obesity epidemic.

Click Here to read the first ten chapters of my book for free.

Friday, September 25, 2009

As Featured On EzineArticles

Losing Weight Does Not Always Mean You Will Be Healthier

Unless you lose weight the correct way. This blog will be exploring different weight loss regimens and how losing weight does not always mean your health will improve.

We've always been told that if we are obese and suffer from heart disease, high blood pressure or diabetes, that if we lose the weight; those diseases will go away. That is not always the case.

Allow me to focus now on 'Weight Watchers,' the biggest of the weight loss companies out there right now. Weight Watchers has been around for many years. I have seen many of my patients lose collectively tons of weight over the years and I also noticed an interesting thing. Those patients who lost 10-20 or even up to 75 pounds, if they suffered from high blood pressure or type 2 diabetes (type 2 is the type of diabetes where you do not need insulin and is supposed to be able to be controlled on diet alone); they still needed to remain on their medications. Yes, they took less medications, but most were unable to stop their meds as their BPs or sugars remained too high for me to stop their meds.

Back in the day when I was still ignorant about the benefits of low carbs, this didn't bother me much because I was happy I was able to reduce the medications of most people; I never once wondered why I couldn't stop these medications in their entirety; heck, I was happy that I got to reduce any meds in the first place.

When I became aware and understood the correct way to eat, and started my patients on low carbs; most patients were able to stop their meds entirely. It has gotten to the point now that even if a patient walks in my door with a BP of 170/110 or a blood sugar of 400; within a week I (really 'I' should be 'they', as it was the patient who put in all the work, I just told them about it) will have almost normalized their BP and their sugars generally have been cut in half to around 200 or less. Remember, this is all without using medications!

Now I was in a good position to give some thought as to why the Weight Watcher regimen, while allowing people to lose weight, most people still needed to take meds. It was because those on Weight Watchers were consuming too many carbs and in those people with high blood pressure and diabetes, carbs will have an independent effect (aside from the obvious obesity concern) on both BP and sugar control.

Before a patient (on a low carb diet) even loses a large amount of weight, BPs and sugars begin to lower. As the weight steadily declines the effect becomes even greater with, in most individuals, a complete normalization of BP and blood sugar---again, without the need for medication.

Weight Watcher's participants continue to eat large amounts of sugar, in the form of the 'wolf in sheep's clothing'--fruits and whole grains and the high sugar containing carrots and corn. Due to this high consumption of sugar, the BPs and sugars will not normalize and the patients will still have to continue with their meds.

Remember, it's all about the sugar---and do not think for a second that fruits and whole grains are better for us---------They are not! Well, come to think of it, they are good for the drug companies, as the more of that supposed good stuff we eat, the more we need to give our money to the drug companies.

Just my thoughts for today, have a great weekend everyone!

BTW (OMG did I just do BTW for 'by the way', oh my god, er, I mean OMG; I think I've been texting too much:-)

But seriously, if you are in the 5 Burroughs of New York, North Jersey, Nassau County or the South Shore of Long Island, listen-in tomorrow on 620 AM, starting at 9 am, where I will be devoting one hour on the radio to discuss the 'correct' way to attack the epidemic of childhood obesity.

A special thanks goes out to Tom, my 6th follower!

Working on number 7.....

Dr Jim

Please go to Amazon.com to order my book or go to DrJamesCarlson.com and request a digital copy of my book for only $11.99!

Check out the nutritional products I endorse by clicking HERE!

Wednesday, September 23, 2009

As Featured On EzineArticles

"Get A Free Cholesterol Check Today"

Sorry it's been awhile since I posted. Been a rough week :-) Anyhow, so I'm driving to a Wedding this weekend when I see the above banner ad outside a CVS store. The first thing I thought was "Cool, do I just need to tell them how much they can make the check out for?" The next thing that came to mind was that the only thing this advertisement does for CVS is to show the people who understand what cholesterol is all about, is that CVS has not a clue that total cholesterol means nothing.

First off, this is a check of your total cholesterol only. And what have we learned about total cholesterol? That's right, total cholesterol means nothing....nothing at all. Total cholesterol is simply the addition of the HDL + LDL + VLDL; these are all added up to arrive at the total cholesterol.

As I've mentioned in previous blogs and throughout my book, if one's HDL or protective cholesterol is elevated, this will usually drive up the total and one's total cholesterol can easily be above 200 with an HDL in the 50-60-or 70 range.. Thus, if you just have your total checked and not the profile I can offer you no useful information about what the number means.

For instance, one may have a total of 240-280, but without the HDL, I cannot tell you if this is bad or good.

"But wait a minute!" I hear some of you yell. If my total is below 200 then it is all good and I don't have to worry about my cholesterol at all. "Not so fast there," I'll respond. I have a good many patients whose total cholesterol's are below 200, but their HDLs are under 40, 30 or even under 20. These people are at high risk for heart disease due to the very low HDLs. These patients need to raise their HDLs to protect themselves against heart disease.

I also get a good number of people whose total cholesterol's are above 200, sometimes close to 300 who need to raise their cholesterol's. This almost always gets a 'are you crazy glare.' I used 'glare' not 'stare' as people can get downright nasty when I give the correct advice, but all their heads are filled up with is the years of brainwashing they've been subjected to, so they think I am a stark raving lunatic when I suggest this.

So the bottom line is that without the HDL and triglycerides, I can offer no useful advice about what one needs to change dietarily. Once again, total cholesterol means nothing...It is a waste of a number.

Thanks CVS for continuing to propagate one of the biggest cholesterol myths out there. Of course the drug companies all advertise that if one's cholesterol is above 200 you must be on meds. This is absolutely false and can place a person in danger. Oh wait, doesn't CVS dispense the prescription medications which lower cholesterol? Hmmm. Having said that, I don't really feel CVS is intending to do anything malicious, it is just continuing to propagate the incorrect beliefs that still persist strongly today, because CVS believes them to be true.

Remember, beliefs can be right or wrong...facts just are...

Dr Jim

PS: Thanks Keri-Ann for being my 5th follower! Who will be my 6th follower? Any takers :-)

Please go to Amazon.com to order my book or go to DrJamesCarlson.com and request a digital copy of my book for only $11.99!

Monday, September 14, 2009

As Featured On EzineArticles
alzheimers, Atkins, cancer, cholesterol, coenzymeQ10, diabetes, fiber, health, heart disease, heartburn, low carb diets, minerals, muscle mass, nutrition, pregnancy, protein, vitamin D, vitamins


Sounds like hype from an infomercial or some Enquirer magazine type article. The thing in this case is it's true. This was the comment made to me from my patient Greg (I received permission to use his name so it's OK. Oh wait, you don't know his last name so I guess all's ok anyway, so much for HIPAA :-)

Greg is a patient of mine who listened to the biochemical nutritional facts I presented to him and began a low carb lifestyle change 10 months ago. At 360 LBs, his blood pressure was elevated, his triglycerides were over 800, he was dehydrated, and had a fatty liver with elevated liver function studies (this indicates an irritated liver with some people progressing toward overt liver failure, that is, cirrhosis, because of this).

3 months after starting low carbs, his triglycerides dropped into the 300 range (still elevated but much, much better), his liver enzymes normalized and he was no longer dehydrated (this was reflected in his BUN/CR which were now normalized). Now 10 months out, he is 100 LBs lighter and I am awaiting his most recent set of labs which he will go for sometime soon.

For any of you who think Greg is an exception, he is not an exception, he is the rule. Simply stated, when one follows a low carb lifestyle, and if they suffer from obesity, high blood pressure, heart disease, type 2 diabetes, high triglycerides or low HDL--starting a low carb lifestyle will correct these and many other medical problems, often without the need for medications. By the way, Greg is now off his blood pressure medication and is no longer giving money to the pharmaceutical companies. All these pharmaceutical companies want everyone to believe is that we all need to be on some-type of medication for one reason or another.

As a side note-remember my blog where I was ripping apart the new drug Trilipix? I actually came across a sample box which had the warning that 'THIS PACKAGE FOR HOUSEHOLDS WITHOUT YOUNG CHILDREN'


How about we re-state that warning and say;

Ok,Ok, back to Greg....

So here's a patient of mine who lost 100 LBs, is off his BP meds, is normalizing his triglycerides, corrected underlying liver irritation and now will never develop cirrhosis from this, and no longer is dehydrated.

Wow, is this magic? No, it's simply the miracle of the low carb, more fat/cholesterol/protein lifestyle change. I've seen it before and I will continue to see it again and again and again.

Greg-------Congratulations to you! Keep up the great work!

Dr Jim

Please go to Amazon.com to order my book or go to DrJamesCarlson.com and request a digital copy of my book for only $11.99!

Friday, September 11, 2009

As Featured On EzineArticles

Why is Nutritional Biochemistry thought to be a Belief?

So I'm with a patient today who would absolutely benefit from a low carb lifestyle (who wouldn't) when the conversation became borderline confrontational. Not for me , of course, but I could tell the patient was becoming aggitated with my suggestion of the correct way to eat.

The comment was made that 'us' doctors all have our different 'feelings' about how to eat. This was an excellent opportunity for me to educate this patient that what I am telling them to do dietarily is not based on my 'feelings' or 'beliefs.'

How do you think I did this?

Those of you who've received my dietary lectures already know the way I explain the difference between beliefs and facts. Remember, beliefs can be right or wrong---facts just are. I used to believe in Santa Claus, and, uh, that didn't turn out to good for me. It was a false belief. Sometimes beliefs are true, sometimes they are false.

I like to use the earth analogy to explain the major difference between beliefs and facts.

It goes like this; I ask the question "Is the Earth flat or round?" Almost everyone answers 'round.' (Those who answer 'flat' get an immediate referral to a psychiatrist. I was just messing with ya, no one has ever answered flat:-)

Then I ask "Is this your belief?" Most answer that "Yes, It is my belief." I immediately correct them and state that "No, it is not your belief, you know this to be true for it is a fact and facts just are. Whether or not you believe the world is round is irrelevent, it is round, that's it and life goes on."

So when I lecture about nutritional biochemistry, I am giving everyone the facts; not my 'belief', 'theory', opinion', or 'supposition.' What I state 'just is' as are facts--they just are.

Most of my collegues become downright agitated when I have a discussion about the facts of nutritional biochemistry; I'm sure because it doesn't gist (is gist really a word?) with what they 'believe' to be true. The big issue with beliefs is that they can become so firmly entrenched in our minds, even when the facts are staring us right in the eye---we miss them and continue on with our beliefs.

Just because a million people 'believe' something to be true, it will never become true if it is not true. A great analogy is found in religious beliefs. Look at the three big religions-Judaism, Christian/Catholicism and the Muslim faith. All the followers of these three big religions believe something different within their faith. Are they all right? Whose wrong? More importantly--Who's right?

I am certain that some people out there may have become offended that I would even use religion to help define the word 'belief' and if you were offended. Good.

Did that offend you even more? Stay with me now. This is important. Become conscious of the emotion you're experiencing right now, especially if you were offended somewhat. Is it anger? frustration? even worse--hatred? Beliefs become such a part of us that the emotions we experience if someone attacks our belief structure run so deep it's hard to know where the emotions are derived from.

This is exactly what happens when I discuss the dietary facts with someone who believes that low fat/low cholesterol is the correct way to eat. The emotions, the tempers, run high. People (doctors) become offended, irritated, aggitated, start raising their voices and some become enraged.


Because I am attacking their belief system with the facts, and no-one likes their beliefs to be questioned. Unfortunately, this is antithetical to progress.

Do I get emotional when I'm discussing nutritional facts with people who do not understand what I tell them is true. Rarely, but it does happen. (I will confess that when collegues of mine start getting emotional I will often laugh, and,yes, that pisses them off even more. I'll then ask them why they are getting so exited and most have no idea why.)

I guess I'll close it here by saying that it is very important we are able to tell the difference between beliefs and facts. When we can do this, we will discover the truths about the world we live in; and this will help us make progress and guards against stagnation.

Have a great weekend! And a hello goes out to all my 4 followers, with a special welcome to my fourth :-)

Who will be the 5th.......

Dr Jim

Please go to Amazon.com to order my book or go to DrJamesCarlson.com and request a digital copy of my book for only $11.99!

Tuesday, September 8, 2009

As Featured On EzineArticles

"Lowering Cholesterol Has Not Been Shown to Lower One's Risk for Heart Disease"

This is a comment made, very quickly I might add, whenever we see an advertisement for cholesterol lowering medications. Tha latest med being heavily advertised is Trilpix. This med is supposed to be helpful with lowering one's total cholesterol, raising the HDL and lowering the triglycerides, which is where the first three letters of this drug came from I suppose.

This drug too mentions the caveat that this medication has not been shown to lower one's risk for heart disease or stroke. The ad also goes on to provoke the patient to 'ask your doctor' about this med.

So now I am a little confused. First off, lowering total cholesterol has not been shown to lower one's risk of heart disease; this medication holds itself out as lowering one's total cholesterol; the ad clearly states this med has not been shown to lower one's risk of heart disease (and stroke); but the viewer is still told to ask their doctor about the drug.

What the h@#$ for!!??

Surely the makers of this product do not, cannot, honestly think a physician who is conscious of this whole cholesterol debacle will prescribe what I like to call a 'waste' of a medication. If a physician knows that their patient should be eating more saturated fat and cholesterol containing foods; their patient will have normal triglycerides and a good HDL number. Therefore, there will be no need to use this new med.

Unfortunately, the vast majority of physicians still hold on tenaciously to the myth of cholesterol lowering to reduce heart disease risk, despite not a single study supporting this.

The fact is that most patients need to raise their cholesterol, the HDL to be precise, which in turn will actually raise the Total as total cholesterol is a function of what the HDL is.

So to my 3 followers (I'm working on getting more, LOL) my comment is don't be fooled into thinking you need to take this med or even ask your doctor about it. If your doctor trys to put you on this med--my advice---Get a new doctor and do it fast!

Dr Jim

PS: Now that summer is over I will make every attempt to have an actual 'daily' blog :-)

Please go to Amazon.com to order my book or go to DrJamesCarlson.com and request a digital copy of my book for only $11.99!