When people ask me what I do, I invariably respond with "I get people healthy." It's short, and usually prompts them to ask the follow on questions of either "what do you mean by that?" or "and how do you do that?", which is a perfect way for me to explain what I really do, which is to teach people how to change their bodies, their health and their very lives through the miracle of truly complete and proper nutrition.
I call myself a "Wellness Consultant" - after I get my certificate in Nutrition I'll add that word as well - I'll be a Nutritional Wellness Consultant. My own sense of integrity won't allow me to claim something that I can't back up with a piece of paper or some other qualification statement. Integrity is very important to me. I guess I truly internalized the West Point Honor Code - "A Cadet will not lie, cheat, or steal, nor tolerate anyone who does," that I lived under for my college years.
We see failures of integrity every day. We see it in our public officials (it's too bad that politician is now virtually synonymous with "liar"); we see it in our captains of corporate and industrial America. We see it in the dishonest salesman, disingenuous offers on TV and on the internet and in our email. I worry far more about the degradation of culture brought about by this tolerance for dishonesty than I am about homosexual marriage, abortion, taxes, or the latest Lady Gaga song or Mapplethorpe art exhibit. I mean, really... those things are so... minor compared to our integrity - for when we lie to another, by either commission or omission, we lie to ourselves as well. What's worse, is that it appears we've started believing our own lies to the point of self-destruction.
Integrity is one of the main reasons that I chose to make Isagenix the basis for my business. I have no prior experience in nutrition - in fact, I was probably the antithesis of nutrition until I found Isagenix. I believed what big-food, big-med, and big-pharma put out - your body can make what it needs from anything you put into it... we have a pill for every ill... better living through chemistry... etc. Now that my eyes have been opened, I feel so silly and naive for all those years of what I realize now were years of rationalization, which is just another way to say "lying to myself".
I made a statement in public a couple months ago that I was pretty sure was true - but afterwards, I realized that I had never actually added up the numbers. The statement was "My top 20 people have released a total of over 500 pounds so far." Within minutes of saying it, I was making a list of my people and how much weight they've lost so far... I was very relieved when it indeed turned out to be true - in fact, my top 17 people have lost over 500 pounds so far - so if anything, I erred on the side of minimizing our accomplishments.
17 people, 500 pounds - do the math... that's an average of 29.41 pounds released per person... and it just keeps getting better. My next goal is for the top 15 to release 500, then the top 25 to hit 1000 pounds. I think about how many thousands and thousands of pounds the top leaders in our company have helped people release (along with the hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars they've helped people earn) along the way and it inspires me to keep on going. I won't lie and say that every day is easy - far from it. It takes time to build a business from the ground up, especially one that is commission based. I have my share of "head-banging" days after not "completing the sale", but then I watch one of our videos with the before and after pictures of some of our 250+ members of our 100 pound club (like the one below) and every time I tear and choke up and remember again how very very much I love what I do. The satisfaction I get from hearing that one of my associates is down another two or three pounds just makes my day. I may have to do other things from time to time to pay the bills, but no matter what I do, I am a Wellness Consultant first...soon to be a Nutritional Wellness Consultant. What's better, is that I'm proud of the working integrity that I can model for my two boys every single day.
"I get people healthy" is the honest truth - and I'm so very happy and grateful for that!
In health! Namaste!
Friday, July 22, 2011
Monday, July 11, 2011
Doctor Experiences Benfits of Cleansing
By Dennis D. Harper, D.O.
Internal cleansing of the body has been practiced by most cultures since the beginning of time. Cleansing techniques often included fasting, drinking lots of water, using specific herbal preparations, bathing in hot springs or going to a shaman/medicine man.
And this traditional practice continues; 60 percent of the world's cultures staill employ some form of cleansing on a regular basis. This concept is very intriguing because it draws a correlation between being clean on the inside and good health.
Most of us would never consider not bathing or brushing our teeth because we know that we would run a greater risk of sickness and disease. Sadly, many do not comprehend the significance of keeping our bodies clean on the inside.
Modern world, modern threats
In thte modern world, all we would really need to be healthy is clean water clean food and clean air. Our bodies know exactly what to do with these three components. But clean water is not easily available anymore. More than 700 different synthetic chemicals have been detected in our water supplies. And consider the air that we breathe. W currently have oxygen levels around 19 to 20 percent. This is less than half the oxygen that was available in earlier days. And what about the food we eat? I was taught at medical school that Americans have the best diet in the world. If that's true, why are we the most obese and ill?
Personal experiences prove pivotal
When I was first introduced to internal cleansing five years ago, I was very reluctant. I decided to try a 9-day cleanse on myself before using it on patients. I measured myself before starting the cleanse. Remarkably, after 9 days, I had released 15 pounds! Eight pounds of water, six pounds of fat, and only one pound of muscle.
I now recommend cleansing to all my patients wh e they come through my office door because of the amazing results I h ave experienced. In the 20 years I have practiced medicine, I have never seen anyother product line like Isagenix that can change a person's state of health so dramatically.
Originally published in Wellness Report, v. 1.1, (c) 2011, Sound Concepts
Internal cleansing of the body has been practiced by most cultures since the beginning of time. Cleansing techniques often included fasting, drinking lots of water, using specific herbal preparations, bathing in hot springs or going to a shaman/medicine man.
And this traditional practice continues; 60 percent of the world's cultures staill employ some form of cleansing on a regular basis. This concept is very intriguing because it draws a correlation between being clean on the inside and good health.
Most of us would never consider not bathing or brushing our teeth because we know that we would run a greater risk of sickness and disease. Sadly, many do not comprehend the significance of keeping our bodies clean on the inside.
Modern world, modern threats
In thte modern world, all we would really need to be healthy is clean water clean food and clean air. Our bodies know exactly what to do with these three components. But clean water is not easily available anymore. More than 700 different synthetic chemicals have been detected in our water supplies. And consider the air that we breathe. W currently have oxygen levels around 19 to 20 percent. This is less than half the oxygen that was available in earlier days. And what about the food we eat? I was taught at medical school that Americans have the best diet in the world. If that's true, why are we the most obese and ill?
Personal experiences prove pivotal
When I was first introduced to internal cleansing five years ago, I was very reluctant. I decided to try a 9-day cleanse on myself before using it on patients. I measured myself before starting the cleanse. Remarkably, after 9 days, I had released 15 pounds! Eight pounds of water, six pounds of fat, and only one pound of muscle.
I now recommend cleansing to all my patients wh e they come through my office door because of the amazing results I h ave experienced. In the 20 years I have practiced medicine, I have never seen anyother product line like Isagenix that can change a person's state of health so dramatically.
Originally published in Wellness Report, v. 1.1, (c) 2011, Sound Concepts
Monday, June 6, 2011
2nd Newsletter Post
| ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
|
Kim and I got our Product B last Wednesday. You can bet we did not ponder the question "To "B" or not to "B" for very long! We both had it in us within an hour of the UPS guy dropping it off.
Are you one of the 55 million people suffering from joint and muscle pain? 
Newsletter Format
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Thursday, May 19, 2011
You Can Eat Healthy For Less!
I agree wholeheartedly with Dr. Harlan's analysis here - having seen it myself. He does a great job of explaining the "upfront" costs - which already make fiscal sense. When you add in the "future cost" of regularly eating fast food (metabolic syndrome, obesity, type-2 diabetes, body toxicity and inflammation), it is truly far far cheaper to choose healthy.
Why Fast Food Isn't Cheaper Than Healthy Food
Tim Harlan, M.D.
Why Fast Food Isn't Cheaper Than Healthy Food
Tim Harlan, M.D.
I get a lot of questions during lectures from people wanting to know how they can eat better when eating healthy is so expensive. They base their questions on claims that unhealthy choices are cheaper. For instance, I saw a recent news story where the reporter walked around Walmart and looked at the value of foods based on the measure of calories per dollar. This is really nothing more than a cute parlor game to say that one dollar will purchase close to 1,000 calories of candy bars but only a single large apple, because it doesn't tell us anything about what we get for our money. Calories are certainly an important part of our diet and weight control, but it is the quality of those calories that matters to our health.
The conclusion often from studies and news reports is that the subsidies on more calorie-dense foods are the culprit Because our government provides funding to farmers growing calorie-dense products like corn (which is processed into sugars) and beef, the typical fast food menu can be advertised as being "cheap, cheap, cheap," and candy bars can be sold for 33 cents each.
This is, however, one of the great myths about healthy eating -- ranking right up there with the fallacy that eating healthy doesn't taste good. I believe it's more economical to cook a fresh, healthy meal than to eat junk food.
The argument I hear most often is that it's cheaper to eat at McDonald's. After going to McDonald's recently and putting together a typical meal for four (mom, dad and two kids), I came up with a total of about $14.00 (I didn't actually buy anything, though). For that money, you get almost nothing of nutritive value, but bland white bread, greasy burgers and fries with a sugary soda.
That same $14.00 will purchase two pounds of lean ground beef, a pack of eight whole wheat buns, lettuce, tomato and enough potatoes to make oven-baked french fries and salad ingredients with money left over for some fresh fruit. The best part is that this is twice as much food as at McDonald's, so there's plenty for leftovers later. Better food at half the price: that's pretty simple. I'll allow that there's no soda included in the home cooked meal, but no one should drink soda anyway and a full pitcher of iced tea costs pennies to make.
At KFC, they sell $5.00 "complete" meals. I say "complete," but they really aren't since there's far too much refined carbohydrates and the only vegetables are deep fried potatoes.
These meals serve one person and generally include two pieces of chicken with fries and a biscuit (no veggies) and a soda. That comes to $20.00 for the same family of four, and for that you can purchase a whole chicken for roasting, four ears of corn on the cob, makings for a side vegetable or a salad and have money left over for fruit for dessert. Sure, the KFC meal is right at 1,000 calories, which makes it 200 calories per dollar, but there's also only 2 grams of fiber in the meal, more than a teaspoon of salt and 16 teaspoons of sugar. In the long run, those poor quality calories end up costing a lot.
The same home cooked meal with one roasted chicken breast, one roasted chicken thigh, a side salad, corn on the cob and an apple comes in at around 600 calories with about a quarter teaspoon salt. There's 11 grams of fiber and half the sugar, but the sugars are from natural sources and not table sugar or high fructose corn syrup. It's a healthy meal for less than KFC.
Sure, if you count this as calories per dollar you come out behind, but not all that much -- and the food is far, far better. The home cooked meal costs 120 calories per dollar, but these are great quality calories: low in sodium and added sugars, high in fiber, much more satisfying and, in my opinion, much tastier than KFC.
I spend a lot of time in grocery stores and it's amazing how much convenience food I see. Take the Healthy Choice penne in tomato sauce frozen meal. For the same family of four that it would take five of these (or maybe even more, considering the amount of calories that each member of the family might need).
At $2.80 per serving, that's a minimum of $14.00. That same 14 bucks will buy a box of whole wheat penne, onions, tomatoes and cheese with money left over for salad and fruit -- and it'll make six servings.
I do get people who want to argue that there's no time to cook, but this is also a myth. Putting a chicken in the oven to roast takes one minute to season and 5 seconds to put in the oven. Same with roasting the corn on the cob. Making a salad dressing and prepping the veggies takes all of about 10 minutes. That's less than 15 minutes work time to make a fantastic dinner. You might stand in line that long at the fast food joint.
There are so many recipes available online that are quick, easy and family friendly. They are inexpensive and delicious, but even those requiring more expensive ingredients are still cheaper than eating out -- and they're so much better for you. These are difficult economic times. One of the best ways to save money and get healthier (which also saves money) is to cook your own meals.
The myth that eating junk food is cheaper is just that: a myth.
This is, however, one of the great myths about healthy eating -- ranking right up there with the fallacy that eating healthy doesn't taste good. I believe it's more economical to cook a fresh, healthy meal than to eat junk food.
The argument I hear most often is that it's cheaper to eat at McDonald's. After going to McDonald's recently and putting together a typical meal for four (mom, dad and two kids), I came up with a total of about $14.00 (I didn't actually buy anything, though). For that money, you get almost nothing of nutritive value, but bland white bread, greasy burgers and fries with a sugary soda.
That same $14.00 will purchase two pounds of lean ground beef, a pack of eight whole wheat buns, lettuce, tomato and enough potatoes to make oven-baked french fries and salad ingredients with money left over for some fresh fruit. The best part is that this is twice as much food as at McDonald's, so there's plenty for leftovers later. Better food at half the price: that's pretty simple. I'll allow that there's no soda included in the home cooked meal, but no one should drink soda anyway and a full pitcher of iced tea costs pennies to make.
At KFC, they sell $5.00 "complete" meals. I say "complete," but they really aren't since there's far too much refined carbohydrates and the only vegetables are deep fried potatoes.
These meals serve one person and generally include two pieces of chicken with fries and a biscuit (no veggies) and a soda. That comes to $20.00 for the same family of four, and for that you can purchase a whole chicken for roasting, four ears of corn on the cob, makings for a side vegetable or a salad and have money left over for fruit for dessert. Sure, the KFC meal is right at 1,000 calories, which makes it 200 calories per dollar, but there's also only 2 grams of fiber in the meal, more than a teaspoon of salt and 16 teaspoons of sugar. In the long run, those poor quality calories end up costing a lot.
The same home cooked meal with one roasted chicken breast, one roasted chicken thigh, a side salad, corn on the cob and an apple comes in at around 600 calories with about a quarter teaspoon salt. There's 11 grams of fiber and half the sugar, but the sugars are from natural sources and not table sugar or high fructose corn syrup. It's a healthy meal for less than KFC.
Sure, if you count this as calories per dollar you come out behind, but not all that much -- and the food is far, far better. The home cooked meal costs 120 calories per dollar, but these are great quality calories: low in sodium and added sugars, high in fiber, much more satisfying and, in my opinion, much tastier than KFC.
I spend a lot of time in grocery stores and it's amazing how much convenience food I see. Take the Healthy Choice penne in tomato sauce frozen meal. For the same family of four that it would take five of these (or maybe even more, considering the amount of calories that each member of the family might need).
At $2.80 per serving, that's a minimum of $14.00. That same 14 bucks will buy a box of whole wheat penne, onions, tomatoes and cheese with money left over for salad and fruit -- and it'll make six servings.
I do get people who want to argue that there's no time to cook, but this is also a myth. Putting a chicken in the oven to roast takes one minute to season and 5 seconds to put in the oven. Same with roasting the corn on the cob. Making a salad dressing and prepping the veggies takes all of about 10 minutes. That's less than 15 minutes work time to make a fantastic dinner. You might stand in line that long at the fast food joint.
There are so many recipes available online that are quick, easy and family friendly. They are inexpensive and delicious, but even those requiring more expensive ingredients are still cheaper than eating out -- and they're so much better for you. These are difficult economic times. One of the best ways to save money and get healthier (which also saves money) is to cook your own meals.
The myth that eating junk food is cheaper is just that: a myth.
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Your Body DOES know the difference!!!
The Not-So-Sweet Truth About High Fructose Corn Syrup
Mark Hyman, MDPracticing physician
Posted: 05/16/11 06:00 AM ET
If you can't convince them, confuse them.
--Harry Truman
--Harry Truman
The current media debate about the benefits (or lack of harm) of high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) in our diet misses the obvious. The average American increased their consumption of HFCS (mostly from sugar sweetened drinks and processed food) from zero to more than 60 pounds per person per year. During that time period, obesity rates have more than tripled and diabetes incidence has increased more than seven-fold. Not perhaps the only cause, but a fact that cannot be ignored.
Doubt and confusion are the currency of deception, and they sow the seeds of complacency. These are used skillfully through massive print and television advertising campaigns by the Corn Refiners Association's attempt to dispel the "myth" that HFCS is harmful and assert through the opinion of "medical and nutrition experts" that it is no different than cane sugar. It is a "natural" product that is a healthy part of our diet when used in moderation.
Except for one problem. When used in moderation, it is a major cause of heart disease, obesity, cancer, dementia, liver failure, tooth decay and more.
The Lengths the Corn Industry Will Go To
The goal of the corn industry is to call into question any claim of harm from consuming high fructose corn syrup, and to confuse and deflect by calling their product natural "corn sugar." That's like calling tobacco in cigarettes natural herbal medicine. Watch the slick ad where a caring father walks hand in hand with his four-year-old daughter through a big question mark carved in an idyllic cornfield.
In the ad, the father tells us:
Like any parent, I have questions about the food my daughter eats -- like high fructose corn syrup. So I started looking for answers from medical and nutrition experts, and what I discovered whether it's corn sugar or cane sugar, your body can't tell the difference. Sugar is sugar. Knowing that makes me feel better about what she eats and that's one less thing to worry about.
Physicians are also targeted directly. I received a 12-page color glossy monograph from the Corn Refiners Association reviewing the "science" that HFCS was safe and no different than cane sugar. I assume the other 700,000 physicians in America received the same information, at who knows what cost.
In addition to this, I received a special "personal" letter from the Corn Refiner's Association outlining every mention of the problems with HCFS in our diet -- whether in print, blogs, books, radio or television. They warned me of the errors of my ways and put me on "notice." For what I am not sure. To think they are tracking this (and me) that closely gives me an Orwellian chill.
New websites like www.sweetsurprise.com and www.cornsugar.com help "set us straight" about HFCS with quotes from professors of nutrition and medicine and thought leaders from Harvard and other stellar institutions.
Why is the corn industry spending millions on misinformation campaigns to convince consumers and health care professionals of the safety of their product? Could it be that the food industry comprises 17 percent of our economy?
But are these twisted sweet lies or a sweet surprise, as the Corn Refiners Association websites claim?
What the Science Says about HFCS
Let's examine the science and insert some common sense into the conversation. These facts may indeed come as a sweet surprise. The ads suggest getting your nutrition advice from your doctor. Having studied this for more than a decade, and having read, interviewed or personally talked with most of the medical and nutrition experts used to bolster the claim that "corn sugar" and cane sugar are essentially the same, quite a different picture emerges and the role of HCFS in promoting obesity, disease and death across the globe becomes clear.
Last week over lunch with Dr. Bruce Ames, one of the foremost nutritional scientists in the world and Dr. Jeffrey Bland, a nutritional biochemist, a student of Linus Pauling and I reviewed the existing science, and Dr. Ames shared shocking new evidence from his research center on how HFCS can trigger body-wide inflammation and obesity.
Here are 5 reasons you should stay way from any product containing high fructose corn syrup.
1. Sugar in any form causes obesity and disease when consumed in pharmacologic doses.
Cane sugar and high fructose corn syrup are indeed both harmful when consumed in pharmacologic doses of 140 pounds per person per year. When one 20-ounce HFCS sweetened soda, sports drink or tea has 17 teaspoons of sugar (and the average teenager often consumes two drinks a day), we are conducting a largely uncontrolled experiment on the human species. Our hunter-gatherer ancestors consumed the equivalent of 20 teaspoons per year, not per day. In this sense, I would agree with the corn industry that sugar is sugar. Quantity matters. But there are some important differences.
2. HFCS and cane sugar are NOT biochemically identical or processed the same way by the body.
High fructose corn syrup is an industrial food product and far from "natural" or a naturally occurring substance. It is extracted from corn stalks through a process so secret that Archer Daniels Midland and Carghill would reportedly not allow the investigative journalist Michael Pollan to observe it for his book, "The Omnivore's Dilemma." The sugars are extracted through a chemical enzymatic process resulting in a chemically and biologically novel compound called HFCS.
Some basic biochemistry will help you understand this. Regular cane sugar (sucrose) is made of two-sugar molecules bound tightly together -- glucose and fructose in equal amounts. The enzymes in your digestive tract must break down the sucrose into glucose and fructose, which are then absorbed into the body.
HFCS also consists of glucose and fructose, not in a 50-50 ratio, but a 55-45 fructose to glucose ratio in an unbound form. Fructose is sweeter than glucose. And HFCS is cheaper than sugar because of the government farm bill corn subsidies. Products with HFCS are sweeter and cheaper than products made with cane sugar. This allowed for the average soda size to balloon from eight ounces to 20 ounces with little financial costs to manufacturers, but great human costs of increased obesity, diabetes and chronic disease.
Now back to biochemistry. Since there is there is no chemical bond between them, no digestion is required, so they are more rapidly absorbed into your blood stream. Fructose goes right to the liver and triggers lipogenesis (the production of fats like triglycerides and cholesterol) This is why it is the major cause of liver damage in this country and causes a condition called "fatty liver," which affects 70 million people. The rapidly absorbed glucose triggers big spikes in insulin -- our body's major fat storage hormone. Both of these features of HFCS lead to increased metabolic disturbances that drive increases in appetite, weight gain, diabetes, heart disease, cancer, dementia and more.
But there was one more thing I learned during lunch with Dr. Bruce Ames. Research done by his group at the Children's Hospital Oakland Research Institute found that free fructose from HFCS requires more energy to be absorbed by the gut and soaks up two phosphorous molecules from ATP (our body's energy source). This depletes the energy fuel source or ATP in our gut required to maintain the integrity of our intestinal lining. Little "tight junctions" cement each intestinal cell together preventing food and bacteria from "leaking" across the intestinal membrane and triggering an immune reaction and body wide inflammation.
High doses of free fructose have been proven to literally punch holes in the intestinal lining, allowing nasty byproducts of toxic gut bacteria and partially digested food proteins to enter your blood stream and trigger the inflammation that we know is at the root of obesity, diabetes, cancer, heart disease, dementia and accelerated aging. Naturally occurring fructose in fruit is part of a complex of nutrients and fiber that doesn't exhibit the same biological effects as the free high fructose doses found in "corn sugar.'
The takeaway: Cane sugar and the industrially produced, euphemistically named "corn sugar" are not biochemically or physiologically the same.
An FDA researcher asked corn producers to ship a barrel of high fructose corn syrup in order to test for contaminants. Her repeated requests were refused until she claimed she represented a newly created soft drink company. She was then promptly shipped a big vat of HFCS that was used as part of the study that showed that HFCS often contains toxic levels of mercury because of chlor-alkali products used in its manufacturing.(i) Poisoned sugar is certainly not "natural."
When HFCS is run through a chemical analyzer or a chromatograph, strange chemical peaks show up that are not glucose or fructose. What are they? Who knows? This certainly calls into question the purity of this processed form of super sugar. The exact nature, effects and toxicity of these funny compounds have not been fully explained, but shouldn't we be protected from the presence of untested chemical compounds in our food supply, especially when the contaminated food product comprises up to 15 to 20 percent of the average American's daily calorie intake?
4. Many independent medical and nutrition experts DO NOT support the use of HFCS in our diet, despite the assertions of the corn industry.
The corn industry's happy looking websites www.cornsugar.com and www.sweetsurprise.com bolster their position that cane sugar and corn sugar are the same by quoting experts, or should we say mis-quoting ...
Barry M. Popkin, Ph.D., Professor, Department of Nutrition, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill has published widely on the dangers of sugar-sweetened drinks and their contribution to the obesity epidemic. In a review of HFCS in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition,(ii) he explains the mechanism by which the free fructose may contribute to obesity. He states that:
"The digestion, absorption and metabolism of fructose differ from those of glucose. Hepatic metabolism of fructose favors de novo lipogenesis [production of fat in the liver]. In addition, unlike glucose, fructose does not stimulate insulin secretion or enhance leptin production. Because insulin and leptin act as key afferent signals in the regulation of food intake and body weight [to control appetite], this suggests that dietary fructose may contribute to increased energy intake and weight gain. Furthermore, calorically sweetened beverages may enhance caloric overconsumption."
He states that HFCS is absorbed more rapidly than regular sugar, and that it doesn't stimulate insulin or leptin production. This prevents you from triggering the body's signals for being full and may lead to overconsumption of total calories.
He concludes by saying that:
"... the increase in consumption of HFCS has a temporal relation to the epidemic of obesity, and the overconsumption of HFCS in calorically sweetened beverages may play a role in the epidemic of obesity."
The corn industry takes his comments out of context to support their position. "All sugar you eat is the same."
True, pharmacologic doses of any kind of sugar are harmful, but the biochemistry of different kinds of sugar and their respective effects on absorption, appetite and metabolism are different.
David S. Ludwig, M.D., Ph.D., Associate Professor of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, and a personal friend has published extensively on the dangers and the obesogenic properties of sugar-sweetened beverages. He was quoted as saying that "high fructose corn syrup is one of the most misunderstood products in the food industry." When I asked him why he supported the corn industry, he told me he didn't and that his comments were taken totally out of context.
Misrepresenting science is one thing, misrepresenting scientists who have been at the forefront of the fight against obesity and high fructose sugar sweetened beverages is quite another.
5. HCFS is almost always a marker of poor-quality, nutrient-poor disease creating industrial food products or "food-like substances."
The last reason to avoid products that contain HFCS is that they are a marker for poor-quality, nutritionally depleted, processed industrial food full of empty calories and artificial ingredients. If you find "high fructose corn syrup" on the label, you can be sure it is not a whole, real, fresh food full of fiber, vitamins, minerals, phytonutrients and antioxidants. Stay away if you want to stay healthy. We still must reduce our overall consumption of sugar, but with this one simple dietary change you can radically reduce your health risks and improve your health.
While debate may rage about the biochemistry and physiology of cane sugar vs. corn sugar, this is, in fact, beside the point (despite the finer points of my scientific analysis above). The conversation has been diverted to a simple assertion that cane sugar and corn sugar are not different.
The real issues are only two.
1. We are consuming HFCS and sugar in pharmacologic quantities never before experienced in human history -- 140 pounds a year vs. 20 teaspoons a year 10,000 years ago.
2. High fructose corn syrup is almost always found in very poor quality foods that are nutritionally vacuous and filled with all sorts of other disease-promoting compounds, fats, salt, chemicals and even mercury.
These critical ideas should be the heart of the national conversation, not the meaningless confusing ads and statements by the corn industry in the media and online that attempt to assure the public that the biochemistry of real sugar and industrially produced sugar from corn are the same.
For more information on the effects of high fructose corn syrup see www.drhyman.com.
Know I'd like to hear from you ...
Do you think there is an association between the introduction of HFCS in our diet and the obesity epidemic?
What reason do you think the Corn Refiners Association has for running such ads and publishing websites like those listed in this article?
What do you think of the science presented here and the general effects of HFCS on the American diet?
Please leave your thoughts by adding a comment below.
To your good health,
Mark Hyman, MD
References
(i) Dufault, R., LeBlanc, B., Schnoll, R. et al. 2009. Mercury from chlor-alkali plants: Measured concentrations in food product sugar.Environ Health. 26(8):2.
(ii) Bray, G.A., Nielsen, S.J., and B.M. Popkin. 2004. Consumption of high-fructose corn syrup in beverages may play a role in the epidemic of obesity. Am J Clin Nutr. 79(4):537-43. Review.
Mark Hyman, M.D. is a practicing physician, founder of The UltraWellness Center, a four-time 'New York Times" bestselling authorand an international leader in the field of Functional Medicine. You can follow him on Twitter, connect with him on LinkedIn, watch his videos on YouTube, become a fan on Facebook and subscribe to his newsletter.
Follow Mark Hyman, MD on Twitter: www.twitter.com/markhymanmd
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)