FDA Bans Most Natural Supplements

Is Margaret Hamburg's recent column in Spooftimes.com funny or beyond sad?  You be the judge.

"The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced today that they are banning 88% of all natural supplements from the market “for the good of the consumer”.

“There are man made pharmaceuticals that work as well or better than many of these herbal remedies”, said FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg.  “We simply want what’s right for the consumer, the insurance companies and the pharmaceutical industry!”

Hamburg pointed out that Lipitor and Crestor are just as good as garlic and bee pollen at lowering bad cholesterol levels.

“We can’t take garlic off the market as a flavor enhancer”, Hamburg continued.  “But we don’t want them making outrageous claims, even if they’re true, about its health benefits“.

Hamburg also said that the anti-arthritis mixture of Glucosamine and Chondritin will be banned from shelves as there are other arthritis treatments and pain relievers currently in development that are nearly as effective.

“We have vital industries to maintain!” Hamburg insisted.  “These supplements are destroying the stock market!”

Hamburg said she practices what she preaches by eating fatty foods and taking cholesterol lowering medications each day."

Fish Oil Rises Over Multivitamins in Popularity, or Does it?

ConsumerLabs.com reports that their survey suggests that fish oil has surpassed multivitamins in popularity.

Guess again.

Mainstream news sources, including the Los Angeles Times and the New York Times, have begun to rehash the survey’s results, heralding fish oil as supplanting multivitamins.

What the newsfeeds fail to account for, however, is that the statistics are somewhat skewed by the poll group. The participants of the survey were only those who subscribe to ConsumerLab’s e-newsletter, and thus more likely to be frequent and multiple supplement users. The survey may not adequately represent the overall U.S. supplement consumer market.

According to Nutrition Business Journal figures, fish oil sales for 2009 reached $976 million, whereas multivitamin sales commanded a colossal $4.8 billion. It’s certainly apparent that fish oil supplements are rising in popularity. Nevertheless, they are still a long way off from matching the sales of the bellwether breadwinner, multivitamins.

Council for Responsible Nutrition Responds to Newsweek Antioxidant Article

Here is the link to the unfortunate article in this week's Newsweek.

http://www.newsweek.com/2011/01/25/antioxidants-fall-from-grace.html#comments

Dr. Duffy MacKay's response:

“It's unfortunate that this article provided an isolated look at the body of science surrounding antioxidants.  For example, this article didn't take into account  the entire body of scientific research, which included a number of studies that have shown that taking antioxidant supplements, including vitamins C and E, beta-carotene, zinc and selenium, consistently over the long-term, can play a role in reducing the risk of chronic disease.  

The article also provided an incomplete picture of the existing scientific evidence supporting the benefits of antioxidants, instead relying exclusively on findings from only negative or null studies, and meta-analyses that many scientists have already criticized.   For example, the article did not mention that a recent published re-analysis of the same data reviewed in the 2008 Cochrane Collaboration (which the author references in her story), found that antioxidants in fact don't boost mortality risks.  Nor did this article reference another recent meta-analysis citing the benefits of vitamin E.   These are just two examples of scientific articles which, if included, would have provided readers with a more balanced perspective on the importance of antioxidants.

Nutrition experts agree that a diet high in fruits and vegetables promotes health and reduces the risk of chronic disease. Yet the reality is that people simply aren’t incorporating enough fruits and vegetables in their diets—and therefore may be missing many of the crucial benefits antioxidants provide—and may benefit from taking antioxidant supplements.  While they shouldn’t be considered magic bullets, consumers can feel confident that, when used properly in combination with eating a healthy diet and getting plenty of exercise, antioxidant supplements can play an important role in maintaining and promoting overall health.  Studies have shown that the number one reason consumers take supplements—including antioxidant supplements—is for the overall health and wellness benefits they provide.  Instead of disparaging consumers for the healthy choices they are making, we should be commending them for being proactive in their efforts towards good health.”

1     Biesalski, HK, et al. Re-examination of a Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Antioxidant Supplementation on Mortality and Health in Randomized Trials. Nutrients 2010;2:929-949.

2.   

         Abner EL, et al.  Vitamin E and All-cause Mortality: A Meta-Analysis. Curr Aging Sci. 2011 Jan 14. 

Stark Warning: Smoking Causes Genetic Damage

In research described as "a stark warning" to those tempted to start smoking, scientists are reporting that cigarette smoke begins to cause genetic damage within minutes — not years — after inhalation into the lungs.

Their report, the first human study to detail the way certain substances in tobacco cause DNA damage linked to cancer, appears in Chemical Research in Toxicology, one of 38 peer-reviewed scientific journals published by the American Chemical Society.

Stephen S. Hecht, Ph.D., and colleagues point out in the report that lung cancer claims a global toll of 3,000 lives each day, largely as a result of cigarette smoking. Smoking also is linked to at least 18 other types of cancer. Evidence indicates that harmful substances in tobacco smoke termed polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, or PAHs, are one of the culprits in causing lung cancer. Until now, however, scientists had not detailed the specific way in which the PAHs in cigarette smoke cause DNA damage in humans.

The scientists added a labeled PAH, phenanthrene, to cigarettes and tracked its fate in 12 volunteers who smoked the cigarettes. They found that phenanthrene quickly forms a toxic substance in the blood known to trash DNA, causing mutations that can cause cancer. The smokers developed maximum levels of the substance in a time frame that surprised even the researchers: Just 15-30 minutes after the volunteers finished smoking. Researchers said the effect is so fast that it's equivalent to injecting the substance directly into the bloodstream.

"This study is unique," writes Hecht, an internationally recognized expert on cancer-causing substances found in cigarette smoke and smokeless tobacco. "It is the first to investigate human metabolism of a PAH specifically delivered by inhalation in cigarette smoke, without interference by other sources of exposure such as air pollution or the diet. The results reported here should serve as a stark warning to those who are considering starting to smoke cigarettes," the article notes.

The authors acknowledged funding from the National Cancer Institute.

Smoking dramatically increases the risk of degenerative eye disease, including macular degeneration.  One wonders why any thinking person would start smoking given today's knowledge.



.

Another Vitamin E Meta-Analysis on Vitamin E and Stroke Risk

The British Medical Journal just published another Vitamin E study suggesting that supplemental Vitamin E increases the risk for hemorrhagic (aneurism, or bleeding in the brain) stroke. Vitamin E did not increase the risk of ischemic (thrombosis, or blood clot) stroke.  This will, no doubt, alarm the public and those docs who only read headlines and don't bother to read the entire study before recommending that their patients stop taking supplemental vitamin E.

Here are a few reasons to stay positive about vitamin E supplementation.

1. The majority of this meta analysis data was derived from studies involving diseases on high risk patients, so the results probably are not all that relevant to the general population. 
2. This analysis only looked at studies involving supplemental vitamin E alone. We know that antioxidants (and all nutrients) don't function in isolation but as part of complex networks, so the idea that a single nutrient will have potent effects is probably misplaced to begin with.
3. The study did not identify the percentage of participants who were supplementing with synthetic (dl) alpha tocopherol vitamin E vs. natural d-alpha tocopherol vitamin E.  
4. Neither did the study identify the lucky subjects who were supplementing with a biochemically balanced mixture of alpha, beta, gamma and delta tocopherols and tocotrienols, which make up a  natural vitamin E molecule.

FYI:  The meta-analysis study authors estimated that for every 1000 high risk patients exposed to supplemental vitamin E they would predict 0.8% more hemorrhagic strokes and 2.1% fewer ischemic strokes.  So the benefits may actually outweigh the risks, when it come to stroke.

ABC's Good Morning America Suggests Supplements No Substitute for Healthy Diet?

Given that Healthy People 2010 data suggests that fewer than 11% of the U.S. population consumes even five servings of fruits and vegetables a day, the October 29 ABC news special suggesting that supplements are not necessary seems beyond irresponsible (the new fruit and vegetable serving intake recommendation is now 9-13 servings a day to reach RDAs of most nutrients.  Nutrient-emply high-calorie junk food has become the norm for a large percentage of the population and nutritional deficiencies that lead to degenerative disease have become common. 

October 29, 2010 Response From the Council for Responsible Nutrition:
Consumers should strive to get their nutrients from eating a healthy diet; however, realistically a large percentage of the population is not getting what they need from food alone. While dietary supplements should not replace a healthy diet, consumers need practical options for getting nutrients, and dietary supplements are a convenient, affordable choice for those consumers who want to ensure their nutritional bases are covered. We need to stop thinking of food and supplements as an either/or situation—they work hand in hand. We encourage consumers to take supplements in combination with other healthy habits, including a well-balanced diet, regular exercise and routine visits with a healthcare professional. More than 150 million Americans take dietary supplements each year—including multivitamins, fish oil, vitamin D, and others—as an insurance policy for good health.

Ellen Troyer, MT MA
Biosyntrx CEO / Chief Research Officer
Voting Member, Council for Responsible Nutrition

The Lost Art of the Apology

This interesting article was written by Judy Blatman for the Council for Responsible Nutrition blog.  It speaks to the large amount of misinformation in today's press.

"There was a time when the press waited for facts to come to light before filing stories or broadcasting accusatory pieces. Those were the days when newsrooms were fat with budgets, and reporters would meet you for a burger and a scotch to get to know you and your industry. There were even fact checkers.

I’m not saying those things don’t exist today—but let’s face it, the network big budgets are gone—and broadcast bureaus and accompanying correspondents have been sliced from their jobs like the meat off the turkey carcass on Thanksgiving. Often there’s very little, if any, time to think about a story before it airs—as producers and editors are held hostage to getting the story out before their competitors. That was tough enough when the competition was two other networks.  Now, everyone is the competition—and getting it out first means living on an endless news cycle.

But still there are people responsible for getting things right. That’s what made it even more frustrating to have watched a couple of weeks ago as the story of the hospitalized high school athletes in Oregon unfolded.

Since all the info I have about the story comes from the press, I’m not completely sure how these athletes ended up with compartment syndrome, or who used the word “creatine” first, but I know what wasn’t known. Which is that at the time the story was reported, there was no proof that creatine was involved. But that didn’t stop a well-respected local doctor or the press from making noise that the supplement industry was unregulated or that creatine was likely involved.

Worst of all, it didn’t stop ABC News from airing a story that was at best, choppy and sloppily slapped together to fit that evening’s “scary story” slot  (or at least that’s how it appeared to me) with just enough innuendo to indict creatine without actually showing any relationship between the incident and the supplement. A story that was craftily produced to be difficult to criticize (or sue) on a factual basis, but edited in such a way that one could easily conclude that creatine was evil.  It was supposition at its best—or worst.  And not at the level of journalism that I would expect from the network news.

To compound matters, as the story unfolded, it became even more evident that creatine was not involved (although I’m not sure that even now, all the facts have been collected). But here’s the thing about creatine and this story—first,  the athletes weren’t taking any, and second, there doesn’t appear to be a scientific connection to creatine and compartment syndrome—the ailment that caused the hospitalization. So you think that at the very least ABC News would remove their story from the website? Or even respond to our email asking for the story to be taken down. Maybe the local doctor would write us back answering the email sent scientist to scientist—suggesting some of his “facts” were not? Or that we might have heard back from at least one of any of the number of print reporters we reached out to—asking them to make corrections to their characterization of supplement industry regulation or urging them to talk to an academic researcher about creatine and compartment syndrome. Nope. Apparently, in the era of a 24/7 news cycle, admitting you may have rushed to judgment or issuing a mea culpa is apparently a lost art.

So, if I’m being honest, I should probably concede that it is possible that the people we reached out to didn’t get our emails—perhaps the notes are stuck in junk mail folders, or we had outdated email addresses. But you know what…why should I bother to check the facts—if they don’t tie in to my story."

The good news is that the Council for Responsible Nutrition does check facts, and they require that member companies check their facts, as well. 

Ellen Troyer, MT MA
Biosyntrx CEO / Chief Research Officer
Voting Member - Council for Responsible Nutrition

Interesting views on a Sensitive Subject

 Wall Street, the Downfall of the Economy, and Dietary Supplements?

By Steve Mister and Mike Greene

As the U.S. Senate takes up the issue of financial regulatory reform this week, rumors are
spreading that it includes a little-known provision that would spell the end of the dietary
supplement industry as we know it. Several grassroots consumer organizations have
even launched a campaign urging consumers to write to their members of Congress and
oppose the bill on that basis, claiming that a possible amendment to the bill that would
provide the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) with more authority is really a secret plot
by Chairman Waxman to undermine DSHEA. The problem is: this claim is not truthful,
it’s misleading and it’s not substantiated by the evidence. If it were a dietary supplement
advertisement, this propaganda would be illegal.

However, just like many impermissible advertising claims, there is a nugget of truth
buried in all the hyperbole. And that truth could have negative consequences for dietary
supplement advertising and a host of other consumer products that are regulated by the
FTC. The tricky part is separating the truth from the fiction. So here is what we know to
be true:

• This week, the Senate is holding floor debate on S 3217, the Restoring American
Financial Stability Act—which is intended to provide reform of the nation’s
regulation of financial institutions. The bill creates a new federal Consumer Financial
Protection Agency (CFPA) with this mission, which incidentally, will remove FTC’s
oversight of financial products and services and give it to the new CFPA.

• The House version of the legislation, HR 4173, was passed by the House of
Representatives back in December. It includes a provision that would offset the
FTC’s reduced authority over financial products with expanded rulemaking authority.
Currently, the FTC may not issue formal rulemaking without getting prior approval
from Congress to conduct such rulemaking. Other agencies with narrower
substantive mandates (like FDA and EPA) have this authority to issue substantive
rulemaking. The FTC used to have it, but after expansive misuse of that power in the
1970s, it was removed from the FTC.

• The House version of the bill was managed by Financial Services Committee
Chairman Barney Frank. Certain provisions were managed on the House floor during
debate by the Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman (and long-time industry
critic) Henry Waxman. That does not mean that Congressman Waxman is the source
of this provision.


• The provision is detrimental to dietary supplements along with a whole host of other
industries that make or market consumer products that are under the jurisdiction of
the FTC. It would give the FTC unfettered ability to make substantive rules
governing the marketing of these products without strict Congressional oversight.


History demonstrates that an FTC with broad jurisdiction and substantive rulemaking
authority can run amok.


• One need only look at recent FTC activity under its existing powers to see examples
of an agency that would like to increase the level of support required for consumer
advertising (new standards for testimonials, a requirement for product-specific
clinical trials, disclosure of financial support for research, etc.)


• There is speculation that Senator Rockefeller may offer the same amendment to the
Senate version of the bill. CRN, along with over 40 other trade associations
representing a broad swath of consumer industries have opposed the provision and are
urging Senator Rockefeller not to offer the language to the Senate bill.


Those are the facts. Granting the FTC new authority across broad sectors of the American
economy is not a necessary or relevant response to the causes of the recent recession. The
financial troubles of the past year have not been laid at the FTC’s doorstep, and
provisions to expand the Commission’s authority are out of place in legislation to reform
the financial system. CRN and other like-minded business groups believe that these
FTC-related issues deserve their own due consideration and debate in the more
appropriate context of an FTC reauthorization, as has been done in the past. In that
context, we could lay out the reasons for our opposition and be sure the concerns are
properly considered.


Unfortunately, the effort to prevent this amendment has led to much misinformation.
Blogs and websites are perpetuating rumors that ultimately discredit the industry’s
legitimate concerns and undermine the credibility and goodwill that industry has built as
a reliable source of information. For example:


o The amendment specifically targets the dietary supplement industry – This is not
true. Nowhere in the amendment are dietary supplements singled out for
disparate treatment. Although the FTC’s history of interest in supplements likely
means that expanded authority would lead to expanded interest in supplements,
the provision addresses all of the FTC’s jurisdiction.


o The amendment is a sneak attack by Congressman Waxman – Again, not true.


There is nothing that suggests Senator Rockefeller is being influenced by
Congressman Waxman. Moreover, there is nothing in the House debate that
indicates that he—as opposed to Congressman Frank—was the original source of
the language. This is a case of identifying an industry critic with the cause to
misrepresent this as a plot against supplements.


o A prosecution by the FTC means “secret FTC courts,” a presumption of guilt and
criminal penalties. Merely telling the truth can still get an advertiser thrown in
jail – Do we really need to respond to this one? Administrative law judges
adjudicate FTC proceedings, all of which are appealable to the District court, and
provide due process protections to the litigants. In fact, a recent decision
completely dismissed the FTC’s case, holding that the advertiser’s support for its
supplement ad was sufficient, even where there was conflicting data about the
efficacy of the product.


o This amendment is the end of the dietary supplement marketplace; it will take
your vitamins away from you – C’mon, how many times will we try this
exaggerated claim before consumers realize we are just “crying wolf”? Yes, the
expanded FTC authority could make it more difficult to craft advertising to our
consumers, but it is hardly the end of the industry. Overplaying our hand makes it
hard to be taken serious when a real threat (like the McCain bill) does arise.


It is up to industry and consumers to correct this misinformation as quickly as possible
before any further damage is done to the credibility of mainstream, responsible dietary
supplement industry and the propaganda being circulated makes us all look paranoid and
irresponsible.

Steve Mister and Mike Green, both employees of the Council for Responsible Nutrition, clearly stated that this article represents their opinions and does not necessarily reflect the views of CRN or an official position of the association.

The Empowered Patient

More and more people who live with chronic conditions are becoming actively involved in high-stake health care decisions.  Professor James Burroughs of the University of Virginia designed a brilliant survey to identify traits and habits of people who feel empowered to take a lead role in managing his or her health care.

The questions included:

• Relationships with doctors
• Treatment history
• Social habits
• Need for cognition
• Self-confidence
• Media preferences

The survey suggests that people who take a direct role in managing their treatment plan have several traits that other more traditional patients lack.  The survey also discovered what factors don't influence the chances of a person being an empowered patient.  30 percent of the survey was identified as Empowered Patients.

This group likes situations that require a lot of thinking and they like the challenge of solving a problem. These patients were more likely to have a strong sense of self-efficacy, meaning that they were confident in their ability to accomplish almost anything if they decide to do it.

Interestingly, education, income, source of health insurance had almost no effect!

Empowered patients are leading the way online

When asked about personal experiences or seeking out other patients' stories, empowered patients were much more likely to be doing both of these things.  They take a more active role online that traditional patients do. Their tendency to be on the early edge of the social networking curve was much stronger than traditional patients.  Empowered patients preferred a combination of printed patient education materials and brand.com web sites over television and magazine ads.  They did not appreciate being talked down to.

Empowered patients still rely on traditional medical authorities to help improve their health, but they're not willing to cede all control.

The obvious question: can the other 70 percent be motivated or influenced to become empowered patients?

Dr. Burroughs and his team of researchers found that 50 percent of the the survey group had many of the same tendencies and personality traits as the empowered patients who fell into the 30 percent group. They could be influenced by appealing to their need to be addressed in a direct, straightforward manner, as opposed to a patronizing approach.  This group is likely to be swayed by social appeals from empowered patients. 

Empowered patients have the potential to be influencers and affect the opinions of traditional patients.

The 20% group did not share any qualities with the other two groups and the researchers suggested it unlikely that they could become motivated to become empowered patients.

Given the lack of available health care dollars now and in the future, it should be the goal of government and industry to empower as many patients as possible.  Empowered people take more personal responsibility for their healthcare and understand that lifestyle decisions matter.

Addendum: While writing this blog piece I kept thinking about Dan Roberts http://www.mdsupport.org/ community of empowered AMD patients.  Kudos again to Dan for all he has done to help worldwide AMD patients become more empowered. And Major Kudos to the mdsupport community members who have or will become Empowered Patients.

Advance Info From Healthy People 2010

Health & Human Services establish health and disease prevention goals every decade in a program called the Healthy People Project.  Although the next report isn't due until 2011; early reports suggest that the Healthy People Project goals are down 41 percent from the last decade.

In the area of nutrition, the percentage of people consuming the recommended servings of vegetables and grains per day has ranged from 4 to 11 percent during the past 9 years, well short of the 2010 50 percent target. In 2000, 25 percent of the population was obese. The HHS goal was to lower that number to 15 percent by 2010. The report suggests that the number of obese US citizens has actually increased to 34 percent.

Given that excess weight and improper nutrition increases the risk of heart disease, stroke, cancers, diabetes and eye disease, just to name a few, our government disease prevention messages don't seem to be getting to the public, or a large portion of the medical community.

It doesn't help when doctors refuse to discuss weight issues with their patients because it's uncomfortable for the doctor.  Nor, does it help when doctors tell their patients that they can get all the nutrients they need from their diets, since over 90 percent of the patients they see in their practices are nutrient deficient, 34 percent are obese and 65 percent are overweight -  if the HHS numbers are right.

Adequate nutrition has, sadly, become a major societal and economic issue.  High-profit, nutrient-empty high-calorie junk food, which is more often than not subsidized by our government, is relatively inexpensive and the most, or only food affordable to a large percentage of our population who have families to feed on low incomes.

The enormous healthcare costs associated with low-cost, nutrient-deficient fast and center-of-the-supermarket food should concern the tax paying public, and certainly the mainstream medical profession.

Eye-Care-Focused Nutritional Biotechnology Company Reformulates Flagship Multiple: Macula Complete -- COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo., Jan. 6 /PRNewswire/ --

Eye-Care-Focused Nutritional Biotechnology Company Reformulates Flagship Multiple: Macula Complete -- COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo., Jan. 6 /PRNewswire/ --

Men for All Seasons

We agree with The Scientists.com - one individual stands out as the most accomplished scientists of 2009.

Unless you have been living under a rock this year, you probably know that Francis Collins, MD, PhD, was appointed director of the National Institutes of Health in August.

The geneticist accepted the position after 15 years at the helm of the National Human Genome Research Institute, during which time he helped finish the Human Genome Project ahead of schedule and under budget. Since taking control of the NIH, Collins has been pushing an agenda focused on personalized medicine and stem cell research, backing the efforts by approving 40 new human embryonic stem cell lines as eligible for federal funding. Dr. Collins has also found time to be a much more public figure than previous NIH directors, taking time out to rock with Aerosmith's Joe Perry and joke around with Stephen Colbert.

While directing the National Human Genome Research Institute, he formed a rock band called 'The Directors" with other NIH scientists.  They frequently dueled with a rock band from Johns Hopkins University, led by esteemed cancer researcher Bert Vogelstein who once said, "Anyone who likes to play with toys has got to like science because scientists have the world's best toys."



Bart Gordon comes in as a close second in our opinion.

As Chairman of the House Committee on Science and Technology, the 13th term Democrat from Tennessee played a key role in ensuring science got a major boost from stimulus funding.

Bart Gordon also authored bills to further nanotechnology research and commercialization (H.R. 554, passed February 11), require that the President create a national water strategy (H.R. 1145, passed April 23), and improve science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) education programs (H.R. 1709, passed June 8).

Gordon also helped allocate $400 million in stimulus funding to start the Department of Energy's Advanced Research Projects Agency -- Energy, which funds high risk, high reward energy research. Although the Congressman announced he won't be running for re-election next year, science sure was lucky to have him around in 2009.

Darwin's Minstrel

The on-line Life Sciences Magazine called The Scientist posted an interesting piece to honor the November 24, 2009 150th anniversary of  Charles Darwin's seminal work, On the Origin of Species.

"Survival of the fittest does not mean survival of the strongest, but survival of those that best fit their environment, " says Brett Keyser, who co-wrote Darwinii, a play that focuses on big ideas, including natural selection, sexual selection, adaptation, and the struggle for survival.

View a delightful Brett Keyser video at this link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uy0GzVD8Ldw

Keyser also has been quoted as saying, "Darwin work added to our understanding of the world.  He showed us that nature is always a delicate balance, which is important for our current understanding of how the decisions we make now can change our environment. "

Big Ideas, Art and Science: perfect entertainment for the 2010 Aspen Ideas Festival.

Ellen Troyer, MT MA
Biosyntrx CEO
Chief Research Officer

Eye Memory

A new study published in the journal Neuron suggests that eye movements pick the right answers in memory tests, even when the brain doesn't.

Apparently, eye movements correspond to activity in the hippocampus, one of the most important learning and memory centers in the brain. Eye movements are now suggested to reveal unconscious memories.

Two researchers showed volunteers in a functional MRI scanner pictures of 3 faces paired with 50 photos of outdoor scenes. The volunteers were then asked to choose which face had been matched with which landscape scene.   When the scene was shown, activity in the hippocampus increased, followed 500 to 750 milliseconds later by eye movements directed toward the correct face, even if the volunteer had clearly chosen a different face.

Eye movements may become a new way of helping scientists understand how much people who are unable to talk and patients with dementia or schizophrenia remember.  People with these disorders may remember far more than they are able to say.   

Bottom line: keep your eyes and brain healthy.

Buy Supplements From Reputable Companies

WASHINGTON, D.C., October 7, 2009 — In response to a “Perspective” article published on-line today by the New England Journal of Medicine, which discusses the regulatory status of dietary supplements, the Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN), the leading trade association representing the dietary supplement industry, issued the following statement by Andrew Shao, Ph.D., vice president, scientific and regulatory affairs, CRN:

“We question how a perspective article about the regulatory status of dietary supplements was accepted for publication in a leading scientific journal, yet facts were not checked. This article contains numerous errors, omissions or misinterpretations with regard to the regulation of dietary supplements, including the misstatement of how botanical supplements were regulated prior to the passage of the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA). The author may be a credible doctor, but his expertise in understanding the practicalities of the regulatory framework for dietary supplements is questionable.

Contrary to what has become an urban myth, DSHEA did not lessen the oversight of dietary supplements—in fact, DSHEA actually provided the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) with new enforcement authority not previously available. For example, DSHEA provided FDA with additional authority to remove adulterated or unsafe supplement products from the market. Further, DSHEA gave FDA authority to issue good manufacturing practices (GMPs) specific to dietary supplements to help ensure the quality and safety of dietary supplements, a critical component of dietary supplement regulation, conspicuously absent from this article. It is already against the law to manufacture and market adulterated or contaminated dietary supplements.

The author chooses to focus on select isolated examples of incidents, as if they were representative of the industry as a whole and fails to place the information into any kind of context. In the first full year that mandatory reporting of serious adverse events was in existence, FDA received only 1,080 total adverse event reports, 672 of which were considered serious. For context, these numbers are minute in comparison to the hundreds of thousands of adverse event reports FDA receives each year for other regulated products such drugs, biologics and medical devices. The overwhelming majority of dietary supplements are safe and well-made and consumers value the benefits these products can provide.

The problems presented by outliers are not isolated to dietary supplements. Like any regulated industry, there are unscrupulous manufacturers that don’t follow the law—but that is not the fault of the law itself nor of responsible manufacturers and changing the law will not deter rogue companies from breaking the law. What is needed are more resources for both FDA and FTC to step up enforcement efforts. The best bet for consumers is to learn as much as they can about the companies from which they plan to purchase supplement products. Stay away from companies making product claims that purport to cure diseases or promise magic bullet results; focus on companies with good reputations, well-known brands, or third-party certifications; and discuss with your physician or other healthcare professional what products or companies he or she recommends. More than 150 million Americans take dietary supplements each year as part of their healthy lifestyle.”

###

I post this as a voting member of the Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN), founded in 1973, is a Washington, D.C.-based trade association representing dietary supplement manufacturers and ingredient suppliers. In addition to complying with a host of federal and state regulations governing dietary supplements in the areas of manufacturing, marketing, quality control and safety, our 70+ manufacturer and supplier members also agree to adhere to additional voluntary guidelines as well as CRN’s Code of Ethics. Visit www.crnusa.org.

How Much Fish Oil

The American Heart Association (AHA) Summary of Recommendations for Omega-3 Fatty Acid Intake as of May 7, 2009.

Population
Patients without documented coronary heart disease (CHD)
AHA Recommendation:
Eat a variety of fatty fish at least twice a week.

Population
Patients with documented CHD
AHA Recommendation:
Consume about 1 gram of EPA+DHA per day, preferably from fatty fish.

Population
Patients who need to lower triglycerides
AHA Recommendation:
2 to 4 grams of EPA +DHA per day, provided as fish oil capsules and always under physician care.

The AHA report suggest that patients taking more than 3 grams of omega-3 fatty acids from capsules can be at increased risk of internal bleeding and suppressed immune system.

What do epidemiological and observational studies show?

The Good News: Epidemiologic and clinical trials have shown that omega-3 fatty acids reduce CVC incidence. Large-scale epidemiologic studies suggest that people at risk for coronary heart disease benefit from consuming omega-3 fatty acids from plants and marine sources.

However, the ideal amount to take isn't clear, and neither the AHA or the Institute of Medicine recommend more than 500 mg per day (3,500 mg per week) for disease prevention. Evidence from a few prospective secondary prevention studies suggest that taking 2 grams of EPA / DHA per day (fatty fish or supplements) reduces deaths from heart disease. Other retrospective studies suggest not.

Fish Oil is the largest selling product in the supplement industry and agressive marketers are not shy about recommending 2 or more grams of EPA/DHA a day for disease prevention. The American Heart Association clearly recommends physician care for those taking over 3 grams of Omega-3 EPA /DHA on a daily basis.

We at Biosyntrx strongly support fish consumption and fish oil supplementation, but it is not the be-all-end-all magic bullet that some suggest. Excessive amounts of supplemental fish oil may inhibit the body's ability to mount a lifesaving inflammatory response if needed.

Good health and certainly eye health is dependent on adequate consumption of the the full-spectrum of nutrients including fatty acids, portion and weight control, shades when in the sun, committment to regular exercise and loving friend and family relationships.

Omega-6 Fatty Acid Jobs

Dietary Omega-6  fatty acid is responsible for the bodies ability to mount a lifesaving inflammatory response when needed. This includes spiking a fever to kill off bacterial and viral infections, swelling to protect bones, and clotting to prevent us from bleeding to death.

Biologist have now discovered that the smell of death or injury that repels living beings has been identified as Omega-6 linoleic acid.  A biology professor at McMaster University, David Rollo, found that corpses all emit the same death stench produced by this fatty acid.

Dr. Rollo suggests that recognizing and avoiding the dead could reduce the chances of catching the disease, or allow you to get away with just enough exposure to activate your inate immunity.

He also suggests that linoleic acid is reliable and quickly released from cells following death.  Evolution appears to have favoured such clues because they were reliable associated with demise, and avoiding contagion and predation are rather critical to survival.

I am always in awe of the the brilliant way the body uses nutrients.

Grand Junction CO & Health Reform

Grand Junction Colorado's health care system is often sited as excellent and one to be envied.

The system excels because of extraordinary collaboration. This did not occur at random or in a vacuum. Effective collaboration results from the tenacious commitment of its key players to a shared vision of community performance, realized through incentives, information sharing, and appreciation of distinct comparative advantages. Many lessons of the Grand Junction experience should inform the national health reform debate.

Lesson #1:
Vision and incentives are essential to an operational sense of community. Grand Junction’s leaders view their own self-interest and the community’s interests as congruent.

Lesson #2:
Information systems and data sharing are essential for collaboration and trust. The electronic records system and the interoperability enable evidence-based collaboration on complex and high-cost cases, across institutions and among clinicians.

Lesson #3:
Complementary institutions pursuing their comparative advantages facilitate collaboration. Grand Junction’s providers allow specialized complements to focus on specific populations to ensure that all residents get the right care at the right time.

Lesson #4:
Primary care is the core of any high performance health system. Throughout a patient’s life, primary care physicians in Grand Junction are involved in all levels of treatment. Continuity and collaboration between primary care physicians, specialists, and other members of care teams leads to higher-quality care, better outcomes, and lower costs. Most importantly, team-based care refocuses the delivery system on the patient, not on the provider.

I am happy to provide a PDF of an article called Grand Junction, Colorado: A Health Community That Works to all interested readers. The authors are Len Nichols, Micah Weinberg and Julie Barnes.

The Healthcare War

Every time I start to semiseriously consider just giving up on today's nasty partisan politics, a favorite writer will force me to take a deep breath, have a good laugh, and in this case - listen to some great music.

Here is San Francisco writer, Sam Barry's September 8 column. Sam is Dr. Betty Kamen's son-in-law. Dr. Kamen is an esteemed member of the Biosyntrx Scientific Advisory Board.

"We are fast approaching the time when we, as a nation—and here I am referring to the United States, not Denmark—must make a decision regarding the healthcare system. Broadly speaking, there are two positions on the healthcare crisis, which can be characterized as follows:

Position 1: Everyone should have healthcare. This should be a national priority. If you think otherwise you are an evil, greedy corporate lobbyist for Big Pharma, the insurance industry, or the AMA, or an insane member of the gun-toting Christian right-wing Republican conspiracy, located somewhere east of Berkeley and west of the Hudson River, probably in Texas or Colorado Springs.

Position 2: Healthcare is for sissies. I have a good job and I have healthcare because I earned it. Later, when I am older, I will have Medicare, which I also earned. Screw the rest of you, except for my loved ones, who deserve nothing but the best because I have family values. People who think differently than me are, in a word, Commies.

As you can see, these two positions are fairly far apart. As I see it, we can all either sit down at the negotiating table and hammer out an agreement that serves the best interests of the nation and its citizenry, or we can grab our weapons, get behind some barricades, and start shooting.

The last time we did this in the United States (the shooting that is)—if you exclude minor incidents like the pitched battles at recent congressional town hall meetings—was during the Civil War. While I am not suggesting we have another civil war over the healthcare crisis, it would solve a couple of problems: one side or the other would win, ending the debate; the economy would get a kick start; many National Guard troops would get to come home from Iraq and Afghanistan to fight Americans right here in America; and there would be some good songs written, which we could all then learn to play on the harmonica. Win, win, win all around."

Thank you Sam, for bringing some much-needed humor to the healthcare issue. As promised, here is a link of you playing two of my favorite tunes. http://www.redroom.com/video/sam-barry-and-todd-swenson-play-theme-black-orpheus-manh%C3%A3-de-carnaval-and-the-way-you-look-ton

Annals of Surgery Abstract on Healthcare Reform

Abstract: The United States has the most expensive and complex healthcare system in the world. Despite the magnitude of funds spent on the system, Americans do not achieve the high standards of health seen in other developed countries.

The current model of health insurance has failed to deliver efficient and effective healthcare. The administrative costs and lack of buying power that arise out of the existing multipayer system are at the root of the problem. The current system also directly contributes to the rising number of uninsured and underinsured Americans.

This lack of insurance leads to poorer health outcomes, and a significant amount of money is lost into the system by paying for these complications. Experience from other countries suggests that tangible improvements can occur with conversion to a single-payer system. However, previous efforts at reform have stalled.

There are many myths commonly held true by both patients and physicians. This inscrutability of the US healthcare system may be the major deterrent to its improvement. A discussion of these myths can lead to increased awareness of the inequality of our healthcare system and the possibilities for improvement.

Sarpel U, Vladeck G, Divina C: Klotman P. Fact and Fiction: Debunking Myths in the US Healthcare System Annals of Surgery: April 2008 - volume 247-Issue 4 - PP 563-569