~~~~
~~~~
~~~~
~~~~
Sugar Diabetes Explained
Diabetes is an epidemic in the Western world that currently affects 246 million sufferers . It is a chronic illness meaning that it's long lasting and often persistes for life . There is currently no solution , however many methods have been found to manage and manage the effects. Read the rest of this entry »
A very grueling affair for the masses to fully get is when it comes to their low calorie die,t is that they should be drinking more water. Read the rest of this entry »
Even though what causes Type II Diabetes is still going on in debates, and mostly there is a strong feeling that heredity, or genetics, plays a paramount role in its development. However, the lifestyle choices that one makes is also a widely accepted theory. Most often, the consensus tends to be that, although one can be genetically predisposed to Type ii diabetes, it is how one chooses to life his/her life that typically ends up determining if the disease will fully develop. If this is indeed the case, as so many people tend to believe, it means that everyone has some control over whether or not they develop this condition. Read the rest of this entry »
Caution: Be wary of high-pressure sales tactics. The highly competitive market for medical alert systems has unfortunately led to some unscrupulous behavior. Read the rest of this entry »
Everywhere you turn the Acai Berry is being praised for its array of health benefits. Experts believe the Acai Berry is one of the most nourishing natural foods on earth. From the streets of Hollywood to your neighborhood, everyone is realizing the amazing potential of this unique berry.
In short, the Acai Berry is taking the nation by storm! For this reason, Acai Berry is now a primary ingredient in many of the most effective supplements on the market. From juices and pulps to candy, Acai berries are making individuals all across the country look and feel better. Read the rest of this entry »
Usually, this is due to hereditary and environmental cause resulting abnormally that leads to high blood sugar levels. This is not a simple disease that can be treated immediately. A disease where pancreas(a part of digestive organ)is unable to secrete enough insulin. Diabetes, a disease that causes the body to metabolize sugar poorly, occurs when either the body attacks the cells producing insulin, the chemical that allows the metabolizing of sugar in the body's cells also known as (Type 1 diabetes) and the body's cells ignore insulin (Type 2 diabetes). They don't have any choice but to quit for the sweets because their health is at risk. They are hook to a medical condition known as diabetes.
TYPES OF DIABETES
The major treatment of this diabetes, even in its earliest stages, is the delivery of artificial insulin by means of injection combined with careful monitoring of blood glucose levels using blood testing monitors. At this point, insulin therapy is necessary to maintain normal or near normal glucose levels. As they enter the second and third trimesters, the more hormones are secreted since they are pregnant, body demands it; this however makes it more difficult for the insulin to help your cells absorb glucose. Extra effort for healthier lifestyle is necessary to fight this condition and win the battle for more productive and happier life. Increase of physical activity, decreasing carbohydrate intake, and losing weight will serve as preliminary treatment. Type 2 diabetes is the most common form of diabetes. This helps and assists insulin supplementation that may control further complication. Read the rest of this entry »
Many people see diet soda is an innocuous, harmless beverage that can’t possibly cause any harm to their waistline since it doesn’t have any calories. Think again.
Research published this summer in the medical journal Circulation shows that people who drink more than one soda a day — whether it’s regular or diet — have an almost 50 percent increased risk for metabolic syndrome, which doubles their risk for heart disease and diabetes.
Two years ago, a study at the University of Texas Health Science Center found that there was a 41 percent increase in the risk for being overweight for every single can of diet soda a person consumed daily.
But how can something with no calories increase the risk for obesity and heart disease?
There are several possible ways.
First, my own theory is that the sweet taste works in the brain to create a conditioned response. The body responds as it usually does to normal sugar — with insulin, the fat-storing hormone. Those circuits in the brain are pretty primitive and ancient, and they can’t immediately distinguish chemical fakery. As far as your brain is concerned, sweet means sugar. It’s entirely possible that physiologically, you would respond to aspartame in the same way as you would to table sugar. It’s only a theory, but it makes sense to me.
Second, sugar creates its own cravings. Just as a taste of rum creates an unstoppable craving in an alcoholic, it’s entirely possible that the taste of sweet, even if it’s fake, creates the same cascade of cravings in a carb addict that regular sugar does, leading to overeating and binging and all the rest of the reasons people put on weight.
Third, many people think that by drinking diet beverages they’re "saving" calories. They subconsciously allow themselves to eat more, figuring it’s not doing as much harm since they’re drinking a diet drink. The diet drink gives them subconscious "permission" to eat more.
What’s worse than making you fat, aspartame may be toxic. Aspartame is made primarily from three ingredients: aspartic acid, phenylalanine and methanol. Methanol, an alcohol, breaks down in the body to formaldehyde, a poison if there ever was one. Apologists for aspartame say that it doesn’t create enough formaldehyde in the body to cause any damage, but I’m not so sure. Exposing children to formaldehyde levels as low as .75 mg daily for several months has been shown to cause gradual toxicity. Plus, diet soda is frequently stored in hot warehouses, causing chemical breakdowns that went undetected in the original safety studies that looked at "ideal" conditions.
Soda is bad news, whether regular or diet. Period.
Note: Dr. Bowden is a nationally known expert on weight loss, nutrition and health. He’s a board certified nutrition specialist with a Master’s degree in psychology. Dr. Bowden is also a life coach, motivational speaker, former personal trainer and author of the award-winning book, Living the Low Carb Life.
[www.jonnybowden.com]
Consider these staggering statistics: according to the American Diabetes Association, about 24 million people suffer from diabetes and a whopping 5 million people are undiagnosed and don’t even know they have the disease!1 Overall, 54 million Americans suffer from some degree of blood sugar imbalance and insulin resistance.1 Most of these people have type II diabetes, which is largely preventable with a healthy diet low-carb, low-sugar diet.
As a practicing physician, I was never taught any primary preventative measures for my patients. At most, I was given some detective tools, such as screening blood sugar in "at risk" patients. It baffles me, as I look back, that I couldn’t see the huge gap in my medical school and residency training. We did nothing to prevent diabetes and did very little to address the underlying mechanisms that stimulate abnormal sugar metabolism!
The main focus of conventional medicine today is still all about using prescription drugs to lower blood sugar, which is too late if you want to reverse the disease itself. There is no question that people with diabetes experience an elevated risk for a variety of other illnesses including heart disease and stroke, blindness, peripheral nerve disease and pain, kidney damage and failure, impotency and skin disorders.
In a 2003 report, published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, childhood obesity rose to 16% of children between ages 6 and 11 (95th percentile of body mass index for age) plus an additional 14.3% were from the 85th to the 95th percentile. This report pointed out that as these children’s body weights increased, so did their consumption of fast foods and soft drinks, trending up by nearly 300%!2
I shudder when I read articles like the one reported in the October 2005 Annals of Internal Medicine, which tracked 4,000 adults over 30 years for the development of obesity. It verified that becoming abnormally overweight now has a current trend such that nine out of 10 men and seven out of 10 women will become overweight! With obesity playing such a huge role in diabetes, heart disease, arthritis, hypertension, depression and many cancers — no wonder the researchers concluded, "more effective prevention and treatment strategies are urgently needed."
If you have been diagnosed with insulin resistance or high blood sugar levels, there are certain nutrients you can take to help control and even lower your blood sugar level.
Several herbal preparations have been used to control blood sugar levels beginning as early as 1550 B.C.3 Here are a few of the herbs that have been adequately studied to determine their actual effects and potencies.
Gymnema sylvestre (leaf). This age-old herb from tropical India destroys sugar taste when the leaves are chewed and is often promoted as an appetite suppressant for weight-loss. More importantly, several small placebo-controlled trials show that gymnema extracts lower blood sugar levels by enhancing the action of insulin. Animal studies indicate that gymnemacan double the number of insulin-producing cells in the pancreas, and bring blood sugar levels to normal. Research findings also indicate that gymnema can improve blood sugar control so that smaller doses of oral diabetes drugs are needed. Several human trials clearly show quite a significant improvement in blood sugar levels with gymnema.4
Fenugreek (Trigonella foenum-graecum). Fenugreek has been found to improve glucose levels, presumably by decreasing absorption of glucose in the small intestine. One large fenugreek study examined participants with poorly controlled Type II diabetes and found an average fasting blood sugar decrease from 151 mg/dL (baseline) to 112 mg/dL after 24 weeks.5
Ginseng root (Korean and American ginseng). Ginseng has been studied and used as a treatment for infections and diabetes generally for up to three months with repeated courses. One study showed a significant reduction in post-prandial glucose versus placebo in Type II diabetes.6
Citrus aurantium (orange bitters). This herb stimulates the sympathetic nervous system, thus increasing metabolism and lowering appetite.
Milk thistle (Silybum marianum). Milk thistle is extremely good at cleansing the liver, an important factor in diabetes. In doses over 1,500 mg per day, loose stools as a result of increased bile flow and secretion can occur.7 This desired effect makes it the herb of choice for any liver-related diseases, including liver toxicity associated with acetaminophen, anti-psychotics, halothane, and alcohol.8
Green tea. Green tea helps increase metabolism and reduce chronic disease. It significantly reduces food intake, body weight, cholesterol and triglyceride levels. In one study, green tea increased insulin activity by about 15-fold, an effect of the active ingredient, EGCG.9
Bilberry (Vaccinium myrtillus). Bilberry leaves have a reported weak anti-diabetic activity and have been shown experimentally to lower blood sugar levels consistently by 26% in rats.10 In folk medicine, its blood sugar-reducing effect is touted so that it is a common constituent in "anti-diabetic" teas.11
Cinnamon. This spice increases sugar metabolism in rodent fat cells 20-fold according to a report in Diabetes Care. Researchers found that less than one-half teaspoon of cinnamon daily for 40 days significantly dropped blood sugar levels in 60 study participants with Type II diabetes.
Devil’s claw (Oplopanax horridum). The Devil’s claw plant reportedly contains insulin-like substances, but its chemistry is still under investigation. The root can be made into a tincture and just five drops on the tongue can help stop sugar cravings.
Blood sugar imbalance and diabetes are both treatable without risky prescription medications if you are willing to take an honest look at what you eat, examine how active you are, and monitor how much stress you experience every day. To help normalize elevated blood sugar levels, consider one or more of the supplements recommended in this article.
American Diabetes Association, Cowie CC, et al. National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey 1999-2002. Diabetes Care. 29(6):1263-1268, 2006.
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Dec 2003. Vol. 78, No. 6, 1068-1073.
David Fitz-Patrick, D. Diabetes and Hormone Center of the Pacific, Ala Moana Pacific Center, Honolulu, Hawaii;
http://www.endocrinologist.com/herbs.html.
Shane-McWhorter, L. Diabetes Spectrum. 14:199-208, 2001.
Sharma RD, et al. Nutr Res. 16:1331-1339,1996.
Vuksan V, et al. Arch Intern Med. 160:1009-1013, 2000.
Luper S.: Altern Med Rev. 3:410-421, 1998.
Pepping J: Am J Health Syst Pharm. 56:1195-1197,1999.
Richard A. Anderson, RA, Ph.D. From the University of California in Santa Barbara but on behalf of the USDA’s Agricultural Research Service in Beltsville, MD.
Cignarella A, et al. Thromb Res. 84:311-322, 1996.
Wichtl MW: Herbal Drugs and Phytopharmaceuticals. Bisset NG, Ed.Stuttgart, Germany, Medpharm Scientific Publishers, 1994.
[Ed. Note: Michael Cutler, M.D. is a board-certified family physician with more than 17 years of clinical experience. He is a graduate of Brigham Young University and Tulane Medical School. Dr. Cutler's practice focuses on integrative solutions to health problems, and behavioral and nutritional medicine. For more information, visit www.truehealth.com.]
People who use artificial sweeteners are heavier, more likely to have diabetes, and more likely to be insulin-resistant compared with nonusers. Results show an inverse association between obesity and diabetes, on one side, and daily total caloric, carbohydrate, and fat intake, on the other side, when comparing artificial sweetener users and control subjects.
The association may reflect the increased use of artificial sweeteners by obese and/or diabetic study participants. "This is a cross-section study, so there are limitations — we cannot say that artificial sweetener use causes obesity, we can say it is associated with it," stated first author Kristofer S. Gravenstein, a postbaccalaureate researcher with the Clinical Research Branch at the National Institute of Aging (NIA), National Institutes of Health (NIH).
Artificial sweeteners activate sweet taste receptors in enteroendocrine cells, leading to the release of incretin, which is known to contribute to glucose absorption. Recent epidemiologic studies in Circulation (2008;117:754-761) and Obesity (2008;16:1894-1900) showed an association between diet soda consumption and the development of obesity and metabolic syndrome.
This report tested whether participants in the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging (BLSA), which began in 1958, differ in anthropometric measures, daily caloric intake, and glucose status, separating them into three different groups: artificial sweetener users, artificial sweetener nonusers, or controls.
A total of 1,257 participants, with a mean age of 64.8 years (range, 21 – 96 years), had data on self-reported 7-day dietary intake, 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT), and anthropometric measures. The major artificial sweetener consumed was aspartame, preferred by 66% of BLSA participants, followed by saccharin (13%), sucralose (1.0%), and combinations of the three (21%).
"In our study, we were actually able to isolate what type of sweetener was used at a certain point in time, as we used food diaries, and not food questionnaires."
"When we first did this analysis, we found that people ate more fat before 1983, which is the year [of] a big increase in artificial sweetener consumption in the American population — it was actually when aspartame was approved and diet Coke was introduced," he explained.
As a result, the study further analyzed data from a subset of participants, starting in 1983. Compared with 550 people who did not use artificial sweeteners, the 443 people who did were younger, heavier, and had a higher body mass index (BMI), yet they did not consume more calories from people who did not use artificial sweeteners. Fat, carbohydrate, protein, and total caloric intake were not different between the two groups (users vs nonusers).
Furthermore, Mr. Gravenstein noted that people who used artificial sweeteners "were less likely to have a normal OGTT, or they were less likely to be diagnosed as having a normal glucose homeostasis."
In terms of glucose status (the impaired glucose tolerance (IGT), and/or impaired fasting glucose (IFG)) the data show that artificial sweetener users "were not different than the prediabetics, i.e., they had the same prevalence of prediabetes," he said, adding that "in our population, people who used artificial sweeteners were twice as likely to have diabetes, 8.8% compared to 4.4% for controls."
Analyzing the data further, the investigators focused on a subpopulation, in which fasting insulin values were available from 374 nonusers and 311 artificial sweetener users. The users had a higher fasting glucose levels, higher fasting insulin levels, and a higher measure of insulin resistance, as measured by the homeostasis model assessment, but glycosylated hemoglobin A1c levels were similar between the two groups.
The researchers suggest an alternative hypothesis, that artificial sweeteners modulate the metabolic rate through enteroendocrine cells, therefore contributing to the development of diabetes and/or obesity. However, this hypothesis needs further testing in longitudinal analysis and intervention studies, said the investigators.
"Also, it could be that artificial sweeteners are causing diabetes, or it could be that there is a higher use of them because a lot of physicians actually recommend people to use artificial sweeteners to prevent diabetes" Mr. Gravenstein said. The researchers are planning to address this question with a prospective analysis.
Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Endocrine Society: Abstract P2-478. Presented June 11, 2009
As the leaves fall and winter weather creeps onto the horizon, the risk for catching a nasty cold or the miserable flu increases. For people with diabetes, catching the flu can be much more than an inconvenience. In fact according to the Centers for Disease control, a diabetic is three times more likely to die from the flu and six times more likely to be hospitalized.
Obviously, all people with diabetes should get a flu shot every year to protect themselves. Most doctors specializing in diabetes also recommend that immediate family members receive a flu shot to limit exposure to the flu virus within the home.
However, as everyone knows, the flu shot is not a guarantee against catching the flu. So diabetics are always looking for ways to increase protection. On one of the social networking sites for people touched by diabetes, members are sharing with each other ideas and natural remedies to help during the cold and flu season.
One member posted an article detailing the protective powers of the common apple. It turns out apples contain quercetin, which is a flavonoid that may stave off the influenza virus when the body is under stress. Other members immediately chimed in to relate that red onions, broccoli, and tea also contain quercetin and can help. One of the positive benefits of this little-known flavonoid is that it can help boost the immune system during times of both physical and psychological stress.
In another part of the site, another member was sharing insights about the benefits of vitamin D. During the winter months, vitamin D – which the body makes from sunlight – is in short supply. The resulting deficiency can often cause a long list of painful maladies, including bone and joint pain, muscle aches, fibromyalgia syndrome, rheumatic disorders, osteoarthritis, and other complaints.
Of course the most basic of all the protective "natural" remedies to protect yourself during the cold and flu season is hand washing. People with diabetes should be extra vigilant in washing their hands regularly with a good anti-bacterial soap and warm water. According to the Mayo Clinic, here are the steps for effective hand washing:
By: Ben Welch
Article Source: http://www.articleinfo.org
Some of our great readers have been confused about the uses of plastic. There has been a great debate raging about using plastic bottles and wraps. My suggestion is to check out 1st who is behind the information that you are reading -lobbying special interest groups behind certain money making industries, etc.
Of course, the choice is up to you as to whether you will use plastic or not. We’re here just to present information to help you make helpful choices.
I have found these articles very informative:
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_17505.cfm
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_17324.cfm
http://www.drmarchese.com/images/The_truth_about_plastic_water_bottles.pdf
http://cancerdietitian.com/plastic/
There are definitely more cautious groups out there, including the Environmental Working Group (EWG).(FYI, they are the ones who made the recommendations on sunscreen).
The EWG says that "BPA is associated with a number of health problems and diseases that are on the rise in the U.S. population, including breast and prostate cancer and infertility. Given widespread human exposure to BPA and hundreds of studies showing its adverse effects, the FDA and EPA must act quickly to set safe levels for BPA exposure based on the latest science on the low-dose toxicity of the chemical."
What Should You Do?
It’s hard to know what to do with conflicting information. Who do you believe and what choices do you make? The decision will be different for each person, but should be made based on the facts.
Just Slightly Reducing Sugar Intake, Increasing Fiber Consumption Reduces Type 2 Diabetes Risk for Hispanic Teenagers. Individuals who reduced added sugar intake by the equivalent of 1 can of soda per day or increased fiber intake by the equivalent of a cup of beans showed improvements in key risk factors for Type 2 diabetes, specifically in insulin secretion and visceral fat.
The improvements occurred independent of group assignment and were equally likely to occur in control group participants.
Hispanic teenagers might lessen some risk factors for Type 2 diabetes by slightly reducing their sugar intake and increasing fiber consumption, according to a study conducted by researchers at the University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine and the L.A. County-USC Medical Center. The study, examined the effect of dietary and activity changes on body composition and metabolism.
The study included 54 Hispanic teens who had an average age of 15. They were split into three groups: those who attended one nutrition class a week, those who attended one nutrition and one strength training class per week, and those who received no health-related intervention.
Researchers found that 55% of all participants — even those in the control group who received no health-related intervention — reduced their sugar consumption by 47 grams each day, which accounted for an average 33% decrease in insulin secretion. In addition, the study found that 59% of all participants increased their fiber consumption by an average of five grams per day, resulting in an average of 10% less visceral fat, which is known to increase the risk of diseases such as diabetes.
Researchers said the teenagers in the control group might have changed their diets because they knew the purpose of the study and were more motivated to make changes. They added that because the control group members also changed their diets, "intensive interventions may not be necessary to achieve modification in sugar and fiber intake."
Individuals who reduced added sugar intake by the equivalent of 1 can of soda per day or increased fiber intake by the equivalent of a cup of beans showed improvements in key risk factors for Type 2 diabetes, specifically in insulin secretion and visceral fat. Improvements occurred independent of group assignment and were equally likely to occur in control group participants.
Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, Vol. 163 No. 4, April 2009
An abstract of the study can be found online.
What are the Right Numbers?
Depending on where you look, recommended blood glucose levels can vary. The American Diabetes Association (ADA) numbers differ from the American College of Endocrinology (ACE) guidelines. The ACE recommendations are more strict than the ADA’s. How do you know which to follow? Ask your healthcare provider which goals are right for you. The table below compares the two sets of guidelines for blood glucose, blood pressure and cholesterol.
How many times a day should you check your blood glucose levels?
Checking your blood glucose levels often through out the day will help you to figure out how to keep good control of your diabetes. First thing in the morning before breakfast, two hours after a meal and before bed are good times to test. Other recommended times include before, during and after an exercise session, especially if it is strenuous or if you are feeling like your blood sugar may be low or high.
What is the A1C?
It’s a blood test that helps you and your doctor monitor your overall glucose control.
It gives an average of the amount of glucose in your blood over a few months’ time. It is usually ordered 2 to 4 times a year. If you are newly diagnosed or having trouble maintaining good day-to-day control, it may be ordered more often.
Sources:
"Checking Your Blood Glucose." American Diabetes Association. ADA. 15 Dec 2006
American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and the American College of Endocrinology, "The AACE System of Intensive Diabetes Self-Management – 2002 Update." The American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists Medical Guidelines for the Management of Diabetes Mellitus. Endocrine Practice Vol. 8. 2002.
For more information click here .
The results are in and both coffee and chocolate have health benefits, but to what extent? Americans are not used to good news about life’s little pleasures. We are told that salt will raise our blood pressure, saturated fat will clog our arteries and high fructose sweeteners in soft drinks will make us fat.
Our Puritan heritage dictates that suffering is good for the soul and that indulgence is suspect. That’s why it comes as such a shock to learn that coffee and chocolate might have health benefits.
Evidence is accumulating that both of these tropical treats may have unexpected bonuses. Coffee drinkers appear to be at lower risk for developing Type 2 diabetes (Nutrition Reviews, April 2007). Several studies support this association and, if proven true, it could represent a huge public health advantage.
Coffee is a complex mixture of chemicals and provides more antioxidants in the diet than many other foods, including many vegetables. That may explain why it is associated with a reduced risk of several cancers, including those of the mouth, throat and esophagus (American Journal of Epidemiology, Dec. 15, 2008). Other cancers (colon, liver and endometrium) also appear less common among coffee drinkers (International Journal of Cancer, April 1, 2009).
Women who drink at least four cups of coffee a day appear to be somewhat less likely to suffer a stroke than women who sip less than one cup a month (Circulation online, Feb. 16, 2009). Coffee also may have some protective effect against heart disease, but the research is contradictory. That might be in part because unfiltered coffee actually seems to raise cholesterol levels.
Another unexpected outcome linked to coffee drinking could be a lower risk of Alzheimer’s disease. Researchers collected data on coffee drinking habits from a large group of Finns in the 1970s and 1980s. Those who drank three to five cups of coffee daily were 65 percent less likely to be diagnosed with Alzheimer’s 20 to 30 years later (Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease, January 2009).
If you think coffee is cool, just imagine the health benefits of dark chocolate. The evidence continues to accumulate that a little high-quality dark chocolate can relax blood vessels, making them more flexible (American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, December 2008).
A study in the same journal (July 2008) found that dark chocolate or cocoa helped blood vessels dilate and lowered blood pressure in overweight people. Other research has shown that dark chocolate can improve insulin sensitivity as well as blood pressure (Journal of Nutrition, September 2008). Increased insulin sensitivity means better blood sugar control.
Dark chocolate also seems to impact the blood in important ways, lowering platelet reactivity, improving cholesterol profiles and decreasing inflammatory markers such as C-reactive protein (Southern Medical Journal, December 2008).
Despite all this good news, it is possible to consume too much of a good thing. Excess caffeine can raise blood pressure, cause anxiety and insomnia and aggravate heartburn. Chocolate also can trigger reflux in some people, and indulging in too many sugar-rich chocolate bars will lead to weight gain.
from Johns-Hopkins
On the Ellen show, Sheryl Crow said this is what caused her breast cancer. It has been identified as the most common cause of the high levels of dioxin in breast cancer tissue.
Polychlorinated dibenzodioxins (PCDDs), or simply dioxins, are a group of polyhalogenated compounds which are significant because they act as environmental pollutants. They are commonly referred to as dioxins for simplicity in scientific publications because every PCDD molecule contains a dioxin skeletal structure. Typically, the p-dioxin skeleton is at the core of a PCDD molecule, giving the molecule a dibenzo-p-dioxin ring system. Members of the PCDD family have been shown to bioaccumulate in humans and wildlife due to their lipophilic properties, and are known teratogens, mutagens, and suspected human carcinogens. They are organic compounds.
Dioxins occur as by-products in the manufacture of organochlorides, in the incineration of chlorine-containing substances such as PVC (polyvinyl chloride), in the bleaching of paper, and from natural sources such as volcanoes and forest fires. There have been many incidents of dioxin pollution resulting from industrial emissions and accidents; the earliest such incidents were in the mid 18th century during the Industrial Revolution. The word "dioxins" may also refer to a similar but unrelated compound, the polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDFs) of like environmental importance.
Sheryl Crow’s oncologist told her: women should not drink bottled water that has been left in a car. The heat reacts with the chemicals in the plastic of the bottle which releases dioxin into the water. Dioxin is
a toxin increasingly found in breast cancer tissue. So please be careful and do not drink bottled water that has been left in a car. Pass this on to all the women in your life.
Health effects in humans
Dioxins build up primarily in fatty tissues over time (bioaccumulate), so even small exposures may eventually reach dangerous levels. In 1994, the US EPA reported that dioxins are a probable carcinogen, but noted that non-cancer effects (reproduction and sexual development, immune system) may pose an even greater threat to human health. TCDD, the most toxic of the dibenzodioxins, is classified as a Group 1 carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). TCDD has a half-life of approximately 8 years in humans, although at high concentrations, the elimination rate is enhanced by metabolism.[18] The health effects of dioxins are mediated by their action on a cellular receptor, the aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR).[19]
Exposure to high levels of dioxins in humans causes a severe form of persistent acne, known as chloracne.[20] A case-control study has shown an elevated risk of sarcoma (a type of cancer) associated with low-level exposure (4.2 fg/m3) to dioxins from incineration plants.[21] High levels of exposures to dioxins have been shown by epidemiological studies to lead to an increased risk of tumours at all sites.[21]
Other effects in humans may include:
Developmental abnormalities in the enamel of children’s teeth.[22][23]
Central and peripheral nervous system pathology[24]
Thyroid disorders[25]
Damage to the immune systems.[26]
Endometriosis[27]
Diabetes[28]
Recent studies have shown that exposure to dioxins changes the ratio of male to female births among a population such that more females are born than males.[29]
Dioxins accumulate in food chains in a fashion similar to other chlorinated compounds (bioaccumulation). This means that even small concentrations in contaminated water can be concentrated up a food chain to dangerous levels due to the long biological half life and low water solubility of dioxins.
Studies of dioxins’ effects in Vietnam
US veterans’ groups and Vietnamese groups, including the Vietnamese government, have convened scientific studies to explore their belief that dioxins were responsible for a host of disorders, including tens of thousands of birth defects in children, that have affected Vietnam veterans as well as an estimated one million Vietnamese, due to their exposure during the Vietnam War to Agent Orange, a defoliant chemical which was widely sprayed over Vietnamese land and which was found to be highly contaminated with TCDD. Several exposure studies showed that some US Vietnam Veterans who were exposed to Agent Orange had serum TCDD levels up to 600 ppt (parts per trillion) many years after they left Vietnam, compared to general population levels of approximately 1 to 2 ppt of TCDD. In Vietnam, TCDD levels up to 1,000,000 ppt have been found in soil and sediments from Agent Orange contaminated areas, three to four decades after spraying. In addition, elevated levels have been measured in food and wildlife in Vietnam.[43]
The most recent study, paid for by the National Academy of Sciences, was released in an April 2003 report. This report is currently (March 2007) being revised for release again later in 2007.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that dioxin levels in Vietnam veterans[44] were in no way atypical when compared against the rest of the population. The only exception existed for those who directly handled Agent Orange. These were members of Operation Ranch Hand. Long-term studies of the members of Ranch Hand have thus far uncovered a possibility of elevated risks of diabetes.
Toxicity
Dioxins are absorbed primarily through dietary intake of fat, as this is where they accumulate in animals and humans. As this accumulation increases the pH of the tissue elevates in acid leaving the cells in an oxidized state. Here is the key to Pathogenic Fungus. In humans, the highly chlorinated dioxins are stored in fatty tissues and are neither readily metabolized nor excreted. The estimated elimination half-life for highly chlorinated dioxins (4-8 chlorine atoms) in humans ranges from 7.8 to 132 years.[16] The use of Essential Oils will assessed the body in the quick removal of these and other toxin.
The persistence of a particular dioxin congener in an animal is thought to be a consequence of its structure. It is believed that dioxins with few chlorines, which thus contain hydrogen atoms on adjacent pairs of carbons, can more readily be oxidized by cytochromes P450.[citation needed] The oxidized dioxins can then be more readily excreted rather than stored for long time.[citation needed]
This information is the kind we need to know that just might save us! Use a stainless steel canteen or a glass bottle instead of plastic!
This information is also being circulated at Walter Reed Army Medical Center
A dioxin chemical causes cancer, especially breast cancer. Dioxins are highly poisonous to the cells of our bodies. Don’t freeze your plastic bottles with water in them as this releases dioxins from the plastic. Recently, Edward Fujimoto, Wellness Program Manager at Castle Hospital , was on a TV program to explain this health hazard.
Sheryl Crow’s oncologist talked about dioxins and how bad they are for us. He said that we should not be heating our food in the microwave using plastic containers…This especially appli es to foods that contain fat.
He said that the combination of fat, high heat, and plastic releases dioxin into the food and ultimately into the cells of the body… Instead, he recommends using glass, such as Corning Ware, Pyrex or ceramiccontainers for heating food. You get the same results, only without the dioxin.
Things as TV dinners, instant ramen and soups, etc., should be removed from the container and heated in something else. Paper isn’t bad but you don’t know what is in the paper. It’s just safer to use 20 tempered glass, Corning Ware, etc.
He reminded us that a while ago some of the fast food restaurants moved away from the foam containers to paper. The dioxin problem is one of the reasons…
Also, he pointed out that plastic wrap, such as Saran wrap, is just as dangerous when placed over foods to be cooked in the microwave. As the food is nuked, the high heat causes poisonous toxins to actually melt out of the plastic wrap and drip into the food. Cover food with a paper towel instead.
