LifeCare Chiropractic

The Best Chiropractic Care in Mesa, Arizona

Environmental

The Bottled Water Story Just Got Scarier

by

Ok. By now, unless you’re living in a cave, you know that BPA from plastic water bottles is not good for us.  So industry has been moving towards BPA free bottles.

But what if the story was so much more complex?  It always is.

First, as way of background, Bisphenol A (BPA) is not good for us and is linked to certain cancers, obesity, infertility and diabetes.  This is a good enough reason to avoid drinking out of plastic water bottles.

Next, the quality of the water in bottled water is usually an issue, as seen in Environmental Working Groups’ bottled water study.  Much of it is merely bottled tap water and concerns of chlorine breakdown products is high.

Finally, where on Earth did the idea that we need to lug around 12.5 ounces of water in the first place come from?  I have certainly addressed our society’s blind devotion to the not-backed-by-research intake of bottled water.  We just don’t need it.  Period.

And yet, despite all of this, bottled water is everywhere.  You can’t go 20 feet in a public place without seeing someone lugging one around, taking off the cap, and taking a short swig.  Most often then bottle is half full.  I just don’t get it.

Just in case all that I’ve written in the past is STILL not enough to convince you to abandon bottled water, I present this particular study.  In it, researchers looked hard to additional compounds that would block the action of either estrogen receptors or testosterone receptors.  Here’s the details:

  1. 18 bottled water products were evaluated, and 24,520 compounds were found (YES- that is 24 THOUSAND).  These compounds were further evaluated for their effects on the estrogen and androgen receptors.
  2. In 13 of the 18 products, chemicals were found that blocked estrogen.
  3. In 16 samples there were antiandrogenic substance (blocking the action of testosterone), in some cases strong enough to block 90% of the action of androgens in just 3.75 ml.
  4. In regards to estrogen, one compound rose to the top: (2-ethylhexyl) fumarate (DEHF).
  5. Despite the knowledge that the bottled waters blocked androgen action, the researchers were unable to lock in which compound was the most to blame,

Overall, this means that entire picture of the bottled water product, whether it is something in the water or from the packaging, is toxic to humans.  Period.  Stop buying and using them NOW.  Instead switch to a reverse-osmosis system (these days, you can purchase a 5 stage unit for around $100)  or a stand alone unit such as a Brita water filter.  If you use the larger, 5 gallon jugs in a dispenser, make sure you’re at least using the BPA free ones.

You’re not going to eliminate your exposure to plastics, but at least we can make a conscious effort to reduce the exposure.  Bottled water is out.  Period.

Chicken With a Side of Arsenic: 4 Reasons to Go Organic

by

We can no longer hide behind the shield of ignorance.  The foods we are eating are killing us.  Slowly.

Orthorexia nervosa is the term used by some psychologists to refer to those of us who go out of our way to live healthy, unprocessed and organic.  While the Latin origins of the word “orthorexia” mean “correct diet,” the lifestyle associated with this has someone now become an actual psychological diagnosis (although not recognized in the new DSM-V).

One could argue that, 10,000 years ago, everyone would have fit the diagnosis.  It is the way we were MEANT to live.  But society has become so accepting of toxic foodstuff and exposures that anyone who does not accept them to some degree is pathologic.

Go figure.

For those of you not eating organic animal products, it’s time for a wake up call.  They should be avoided as much as possible.  There are already a variety of reasons that I have covered in previous blog post that can be read by clicking here.

Before we get to this article, we need to cover a short primer on the heavy metal arsenic.  Without going into too much detail, the mathmatical equation “arsenic = bad” should pretty much sum it up.  Kidney damage, cancer and death (arguably the worst of the 3…) are well known side effects, just to name a few.  Typical exposures are usually through water. but food can be a source as well.

Arsenic containing compounds are used often in the chicken industry (a compound called Roxarsone) to make the chickens grow faster.  Sounds like a great idea to me.  It’s a surprise the bodybuilding community hasn’t picked up on this fantastic idea themselves.  So what if it’s extremely toxic if it’ll help you get bigger faster??

But seriously, though…who EVER thought adding a toxic, carcinogenic (so carcinogenic that even the American Cancer Society agrees that it causes cancer) compound to our food supply?  Luckily as we’ll see from this particular study, organic chicken is a safer choice:

  1. Arsenic levels were TRIPLE the amount in conventional versus organic and antibiotic-free chicken (the organic was only slightly better).
  2. Roxarsone was detected in 20 of 40 conventional samples, 1 of 13 antibiotic-free samples, and none of the 25 organic samples.
  3. Researchers estimated that consumers of conventional chicken would ingest an additional 0.11 µg/day of arsenic compared with consumers of organic chicken.
  4. This increase in arsenic exposure could result in 3.7 additional lifetime bladder and lung cancer cases per 100,000 exposed persons.

While these numbers aren’t very large (3.7 cases out of 100,000 people), it is yet another piece of the puzzle of human chronic disease.  While you may think that this is hard to balance out against the high cost of organic chicken (Costco sells it for about $6/lb), it gets balanced out by smaller serving sizes, which you should be doing anyway.   A plant based lifestyle can still include chicken and beef, but only the higher quality variety.

Male Infertility Problems? Could Monsanto Be to Blame?

by

The blame for infertility usually falls to the female. Rarely is the evil eye cast upon the chance of male infertility problems.

As with the female half of fertility, lifestyle plays a large role in the number and viability of sperm.  Despite this knowledge, visits to fertility “specialists” are usually limited in scope to the female side of things.  This is because we can DO things to the female like give hormones to force fertility or, even more creatively, give hormones to the female to force fertility.  The best known, most successful fertility specialists will even use hormones to force fertility in the female.

On the male side, there are few things we can DO to the male to increase sperm viability.  This is because sperm is usually negatively affected by lifestyle and toxic exposures that need to be improved (with lifestyle) or eliminated (with toxic exposures).  Fertility specialists are not all that great at identifying toxic exposures that will decrease the viability of the sperm.  So what can help or harm male fertility?  Here are a few I’ve touched on over the years:

There are, of course, many other factors, but chemical exposure is high on the list.  Phthalates are compounds found in plastics as well (think “new shower curtain” smell) that are well known to affect fertility in females and males.

All of this sets the stage for this particular article, but before we get into this, you need to understand the concept of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO).

Monsanto, the archetypical evil corporation, makes (among many other toxins) the herbicide Roundup.  Roundup indiscriminately kills growing things.  It would be a bad idea for a farmer, therefore, to spray his fields with Roundup because his crops would get wiped out along with the weeds.  On a white horse rides in Monsanto.  Their scientists twist Nature, splicing in a gene into the seed so that the plant is resistant to Roundup.  Now the happy farmer can coat his fields in Roundup without having to worry about his crops dying.

This is done to a variety of crops like wheat, corn, soy and alfalfa and the process continues to creep into all crops.  So why all the hubbub over GMO crops?  Just because it is completely messing with Mother Nature’s design shouldn’t have anyone worried, should it?

Of course the answer is yes.  Roundup contains a compound called glyphosate.  Glyphosate is the most widely used herbicide in the US, so you can be pretty sure that, unless you are eating all organic, you’re getting a hefty dose of it.  And, at least if you’re a rat in this study, it kills off the Sertoli cells of the testis (these cells support the development of sperm).

Doesn’t sound like a good thing.  Drinking away some brain cells in college is one thing, but eating away the cells that help us guys make sperm is another thing altogether.

Keep in mind that this is a rat study, but here are the specifics:

  1. Roundup exposure was given at low doses (36 ppm) for 30 minutes.
  2. This created oxidative stress and turned on multiple stress-response pathways leading to Sertoli cell death.
  3. Roundup basically led to calcium overload within the cells, which set off oxidative stress and cell death.
  4. Roundup decreased the levels of reduced glutathione (GSH) and increased the amounts of thiobarbituric acid-reactive species (TBARS) and protein carbonyls.
  5. Roundup stimulated the activity of glutathione peroxidase, glutathione reductase, glutathione S-transferase, γ-glutamyltransferase, catalase, superoxide dismutase, and glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase, supporting downregulated GSH levels (basically, the cells were trying to protect themselves, albeit unsuccessfully).

So the next time you see the Millions Against Monsanto or the Occupy Monsanto FB page, instead of thinking that these are a bunch of fringe-environmentalists, it might be a good idea to listen to what they have to say.

EPA Says US Children Face Environmental Health Threats – (01-22-01)

by

EPA Says US Children Face Environmental Health Threats

I don’t mean to diminish the importance of maintaining a clean environment. It is unquestionable that we have toxins in our environment that negatively impact our health. The best way I can illustrate my concern is with a conversation I had with an asthmatic’s mother recently. The mother had done everything she could think of; got rid of the cat, uses air filters, covers on the mattress and pillows, etc… But she never once considered attacking the problem from inside. By improving her daughter’s health. The rates of asthma are increasing, and I’m afraid we are going to blame it all on the external environment, and not claim any personal responsibility for the internal environment.

(article) Fewer US children now live in counties with heavily polluted air, but children face other growing environmental health problems such as asthma, the US Environmental Protection Agency said on Monday. Outgoing EPA Administrator Carol Browner used the report to highlight concerns of the Clinton administration, which has fewer than 2 weeks left in office. “The Clinton-Gore administration has made the protection of children’s health one of its highest environmental priorities,” Browner said in a statement. “We especially are concerned about such issues as exposure to lead and pesticides and rising incidence of childhood asthma.” The report showed there has been some progress in curbing environmental health threats to children. For example, data showed a decline from 28% in 1990 to 23% in 1998 in the percentage of American US living in counties where one or more of a half-dozen key air pollutants exceed national air quality standards. Those pollutants include carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide and lead. The EPA also noted a decrease in the percentage of homes with both a tobacco smoker and a child under age 7. That fell from 29% in 1994 to 19% in 1999, the study said. Another improvement occurred in the availability of safe drinking water for children. The percentage of children living in areas that logged violations of drinking water standards fell from 19% in 1993 to 8% in 1998. But other trends are worrisome, according to the EPA, which found that environmental health problems are consistently higher among low-income families. Poor black children have a higher rate of asthma than children in other racial groups and income groups. Also, the prevalence of asthma among all children in the US increased from 5.8% in 1990 to 7.5% in 1995, the agency said. The EPA said that its report could not offer any quick fixes to the health issues, and instead it outlined how the federal government needs to develop better measurements and data to address children’s environmental health issues. The EPA separately announced that it will require companies to make public more information about their lead emissions into the air, water and land. The new rules will require companies that annually use more than 100 pounds of lead and lead compounds to provide information to the EPA under the agency’s consumer right-to-know program. Previously, reporting rules applied to users of more than 10,000 pounds annually.

 

Children, behavioural problems and lead – (10-01-01)

by

Children, behavioral problems and lead

This article finds an association with lead and behavioral problems in children. Once again we see a link between environmental factors and psychological health in children, and yet the concept of making changes in the child’s environment as a portion of therapy is foreign to many clinicians. Avoiding processed foods with no intake of preservatives, artificial coloring or flavors is a key to beginning to address these problems. The child with ADD does not have a Ritalin deficiency–they have a biochemical imbalance somewhere that may be able to be fixed with non-pharmacological means.

eADC — Abstracts: Lewendon et al. 85 (4): 286

Read entire article here

 

Lifestyle, reproductive, environmental exposures and RA – (10-01-01)

by

Lifestyle, reproductive, environmental exposures and RA

This article brings many things out into the open. First and foremost is the hopes that clinicians will begin to view RA, not as a disease locked into our genes, but rather one heavily dependent upon lifestyle factors that are indeed modifiable. And, if the presence of RA is indeed linked that environment, than changing that environment would have an impact. And many times for most patients it does. Lastly, look at some of the environmental factors…drinking well water, exposure to hair dyes…sounds like a hair analysis for heavy metals would be warranted in all RA patients.

Ann Rheum Dis — Abstracts: Olsson et al. 60 (10): 934

Read entire article here

Environmental toxins can have their negative effects by inhibiting the methylation of DNA – (04-08-04)

by

Activation of methionine synthase by insulin-like growth factor-1 and dopamine: a target for neurodevelopmental toxins and thimerosal

For those of us that are not biochemists and our eyes glazed over at the title to this one–basically, environmental toxins can have their negative effects by inhibiting the methylation of DNA. Remember that methylation reactions are incredibly important and effect such a basic role in human physiology. Thus, problems with methylation can lead to problems in many organ systems.

In this study, the authors found that environmental toxins such as mercury-containing thimerosal inhibit DNA methylation. For the life of me, I cannot see how anyone in the pharmaceutical industry could have even considered the use of mercury as a preservative. I can see it now…”I need something to extend the shelf live of this vaccine so we can make a larger profit on vaccines given to infants. Hey–how about that potent neurotoxin mercury?”

Activation of methionine synthase by insulin-like growth factor-1 and dopamine: a target for neurodevelopmental toxins and thimerosal.

Read entire article here

Link between environmental chemicals and human reproductive health – (03-01-04)

by

How strong is the evidence of a link between environmental chemicals and adverse effects on human reproductive health?

For those concerned about environmental toxicity this is a good review article. The take home message is that these chemicals from our environment have a definite impact on our health, and reproductive effects are only one type. Many of these chemicals have estrogen-like activities and contribute to many women in our society being estrogen dominant. Dr. John Lee’s strong push for use of natural progesterone would help lower the impact of these xenoestrogens.

bmj.com Sharpe and Irvine 328 (7437): 447 –

Read entire article here