Sweet Suicide Promo Video
November 6, 2009
Radio Show Announcements 10/4/09
October 3, 2009
Dr. Nancy Appleton will appear on the radio show Gab with the Gurus on Blog Talk Radio on 10/20/09. Connie Bennett (sugar shock) will interview Dr. Appleton at 2pm EST. Follow this link:
Radio Show Announcements 8/30/09
August 30, 2009
Doctor Appleton has appeared or will appear soon in radio interviews at the following links:
East West Health Clinic -
My Thin Lifestyle – http://www.mythinlifestyle.com/interviews.php?guest=4&type=previous
1800 Chemist – www.1800chemist.com, click on Health Connection Radio, then Taped Broadcasts
thank you
Your Heart is Sweet Enough
August 26, 2009
© 2009 Nancy Appleton PhD and G.N. Jacobs
Authors of Suicide by Sugar
http://nancyappletonbooks.wordpress.com
Perhaps, you’ve already read one of the many variations of recent statements on sugar from The American Heart Association? We at Nancy Appleton Books are very happy, so much so that we’ll take a moment to do the Snoopy Dance. On second thought, the dance looks stupid when real people do it.
So, what does the American Heart Association’s instructions that everyone should cut their added sugar intake by 70-percent mean beyond giving Doctor Appleton a moment where she gets to say I told you so sometime back in 1986? Well, that depends on your circumstances, because we think the Heart Association has picked a sugar threshold that is still well above what is best for optimal health, but also represents a vast improvement over how things are done now.
Data collected between 2001 and 2004 and cited in the statement put the average American’s sugar consumption at 22 teaspoons or 355 extra calories of sugar per day. Citing recent studies that generally link sugar to obesity, diabetes and heart disease, the association has decided that men on 2,200-calorie diets should cut their sugar intake to 9 teaspoons or 150 calories per day. Woman in similar actuarial brackets assumed to eat 1,800 calories per day are instructed to cut down to 6 teaspoons or 100 calories per day.
Just so you know, while these “official” recommendations may not be enough for some people to lose weight and become healthier, they do represent threats to the major producers of sugar in our modern diet. A soda manufacturer, for instance, will worry because the average cola tips the scale at 8-10 teaspoons or 130-150 calories. The heart association published statistics that break down our sugar usage to regular soda (33%), sugars and candy (16.1%), cakes, cookies and pie (12.9%), fruit drinks (9.7%), dairy desserts and milk products (8.6%) and other grain-based treats (5.8%).
Even with other categories of foods that deliver sugar to an unsuspecting populace not discussed in this breakdown, a reduction to 9 and 6 teaspoons respectively means many sugar producers may change their business model. We’ll discuss what the heart association left out in a later paragraph.
In her first book Lick the Sugar Habit, Dr. Appleton states that the human body needs only about 2 teaspoons of blood sugar (glucose) per day. Normal consumption of whole fruits, vegetables and grains will provide this amount of glucose without resort to any added sugar at all![i] So you see, 6 or 9 teaspoons of sugar versus 2 teaspoons still means that the heart association people have quite a ways to go before they get our full support.
We also have reason to wonder if the statement writers have based their sugar consumption numbers on statistics that underreport the real story. Statistics on sugar vary between reports depending on who is doing the test and how close they are to the U.S. Government, which until very recently thought nothing was wrong with sugar if you brushed your teeth. In 1989, the Berkley Wellness letter, estimated that sugar consumption in 1985 to be 133 pounds per year or 500 to 600 calories per day per person.[ii] We are already well above the numbers cited by the heart association statement written nearly twenty years later. We have in the years since raised yearly sugar consumption to well over 150 pounds per person per year.
One thing that we can completely agree on with the American Heart Association is the high degree to which soda delivers the most sugar to the most people. Their information says that soda represents a third of all sugar injected into the average diet. Our information may not exactly agree, but still says that we get too much sugar from soft drinks, lemonade, punch and whatever Tang is defined as. We devoted a whole chapter of Suicide by Sugar to soft drinks and other similar sugary drinks.
In 2005, the average American was estimated to drink 35.5 gallons of just regular soda, which when the other categories of sugary drinks are added in comes out to the equivalent of 637 cans of soda per person per year.[iii] We cited a statement from the American Academy of Pediatrics made in 2004 that said that all members should advocate for the removal of all sugary drinks from schools. The primary reason was to prevent obesity in children and to make sure that sugar didn’t replace healthy nutrients in children’s diets.[iv]
The Heart Association has come out for sugar reductions and we applaud. But, we find it interesting that the bulk of the recommendations fall against the easy culprits in our sweet diets: soda, ice cream, cake, pie, but not some others that may in the long run be more useful. We understand about birthday parties and the social reasons we eat sugar, even though we assume many people will act like addicts and lose the ability to say “no more today.” But, shouldn’t sugar reductions fall against all sugar producers equally?
As of this writing, Mr. Jacobs holds a Heinz ketchup bottle in his hands with this ingredient list: tomato concentrate, distilled vinegar, HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP, CORN SYRUP, salt, spice, onion powder, natural flavoring. He also pulled out a can of his generic brand chili where SUGAR and MODFIED CORN STARCH are listed together about in the middle of the list. So far, there is no call on the part of the Heart Association to question the sugar that is in regular processed food that doesn’t need to be there from the point of view of taste.
Mr. Jacobs admits to making compromises with some sugar-laden foods for convenience. He refuses to boil beans and simmer down meat and spices to make his own chili, a recipe that he was never taught, because he already spends too much time in the kitchen some days. He is trying to wean himself off of ketchup as a base for marinara sauce in favor of steamed tomatoes. He reports mixed results. But, these foods aren’t supposed to taste sweet; yet, we see sugar in all of its many names on the labels.
We would suggest to the Heart Association to take a look at the sugar in these processed foods and see if advocating for cans of chili without sugar added would help reduce sugar consumption without being so draconian about the obvious sugar sources. Yes, in a perfect world whole fruit with a tiny bit of cream for the lactose tolerant would replace the fudge sundae, but the short term comfort of these foods is very powerful.
Instead of denying the occasional fall off the wagon doesn’t it make more sense to start with foods that the sugar taste is practically overwhelmed by all the other spices as to be tasteless? Sugar is not a preservative and canned meat is vacuum-sealed, so preservation isn’t the reason for this practice. We hope it isn’t because sugar is addictive, another of our common rants.
Sugar upsets body chemistry and helps cause heart disease, diabetes, obesity and many other maladies. Doctor Appleton has said this for more than 30 years and we feel good that other health groups are now catching on. It is a good day.
http://nancyappletonbooks.wordpress.com
[i] Appleton, N. Lick the Sugar Habit. (New York: Avery Penguin Putnam, 1988) Pg 13.
[ii] University of California, Berkley Wellness Letter 6, No. 3 December 1989, pp 4-5
[iii] U.S. Department of Agriculture “Food Availabilty: Custom Queries.” www.ers.usda.gov/Data/FoodConsumption/FoodAvailQueriable.aspx
[iv] Taras, H.L., et al. “Policy Statement” Pediatrics. Jan 2004; 113; 1: 152-154.
Clear Eyes Without Cuts
July 24, 2009
© 2009 Nancy Appleton PhD and G.N. Jacobs
http://nancyappletonbooks.wordpress.com
How does a non-surgical treatment for cataracts grab you? As we age, cataract-related eye problems will only become more numerous. Estimates published in 2003 said that 42-percent of all blindness cases worldwide are due to cataracts and that 28,000 new cases were reported daily. These estimates also said that 43-percent of ophthalmologist referrals for Medicare patients were for cataracts. In civilized countries, mainstream treatment says surgery, even though there is up to a 50-percent chance of a relapse within two years and up to a 2-percent chance of surgical complications. In the rest of the world without enough trained eye surgeons, treatment may only be a shrug. Apparently, we need a non-surgical treatment that may help prevent and reverse the formation of cataracts.
A cataract is an eye problem consisting of proteins that fail to respond to the body’s natural antioxidants to remove Free Radicals to deal with oxidative stress. The proteins turn brown and yellow in the lens and cloud up vision. This process occurs during glycation or glycosylation, which is the process of how excess sugar binds with protein. Sugar is supposed to bind with proteins using enzymes, but if the body gets too much sugar this process happens differently and many bad results follow from these Advanced Glycated End Products (AGE). Glycation and oxidative stress are paired stressors on the body and cataracts are one possible outcome.
So, if there are just enough reasons to avoid surgery how do we prevent cataracts? Of course, Dr. Appleton will find at least one study that directly says sugar helps cause cataracts. In a recent study conducted in Pakistan, the researchers found that higher fructose levels in the blood led to reduced antioxidants and created conditions that could predict cataract formation.[i]
However, even if a cataract patient stops with the sugar the condition can continue to get worse. What to do? Much research has centered on variations of the antioxidant L-carnosine in an eye drop solution. Eventually, trial and error settled on N-acetylcarnosine as being the best way to get the L-carnosine into the eye without it breaking down into histamines too soon, so that it can work to clear up the oxidative stress that clouds vision.[ii]
A 1-percent solution of NALC dropped into the eye at least twice a day fights with the Free Radicals in the lens by binding with the glycation products that would otherwise bind with various proteins in the lens. The makers of Con-C, one such NALC formula, report consistent results above 80-percent improvement for all classes of cataract patients, even those who had vision problems for more than 20 years all without side effects.[iii]
For most patients, it takes at least three months for the changes in the eyes to become noticeable as improved vision. Obviously, the reminder to consult a medical professional before starting any treatment applies here as well, but you now have some alternatives to discuss before you go under the knife. To be fair, Con-C shares the market with another similar formula called Brite Eyes. We presume an equal effectiveness.
http://nancyappletonbooks.wordpress.com
[i] Gul, A. et al. “Role of fructose concentration on cataractogenesis in senile diabetic and non-diabetic patients.” Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2009 Jun;247(6):809-14. Epub 2009 Feb 6.
[ii] Babizhayev MA, et al. “N-Acetylcarnosine and histidyl-hydrazide are potent agents for multitargeted ophthalmic therapy of senile cataracts and diabetic ocular complications.” J Drug Target. 2009 Jan;17(1):36-63.
[iii] Babizhayev MA, et al. “N-Acetylcarnosine sustained drug delivery eye drops to control the signs of ageless vision: Glare sensitivity, cataract amelioration and quality of vision currently available treatment for the challenging 50,000-patient population.” Clin Interv Aging. 2009;4(1):31-50. Epub 2009 May 14.
Sugar and the Mind
July 24, 2009
© 2009 Nancy Appleton PhD and G.N. Jacobs
http://nancyappletonbooks.wordpress.com
Does sugar impair memory? According to rat studies conducted at Georgia State University, apparently so. Adult rats were given diets of either 0-percent or 60-percent fructose and ran through a water maze to test performance. The short version: the fructose impaired the rats’ ability to remember the location of the target platform.
First, all the rats were put into a maze sunk into a tank and set free to find a platform on which a lever or other device to get the rodents out of the water had been placed. Then, a few days later, the rats were put in the same maze only without the platform. The differences between the high fructose diet and the zero fructose diet were recorded.
“What we discovered is that the fructose diet doesn’t affect their ability to learn,” said Marise Parent, the head researcher. “But, they can’t seem to remember as well where the platform was when you take it away. They swam more randomly than rats fed a control diet.”[i]
The researchers didn’t find any effect on the first time trial and error learning process that enabled the rats to find the platform, just the ability to employ the abstract spatial memory that says, “the platform should be here based on yesterday’s results.” If a rat or person, for that matter, learns a task, but can’t prove they learned the task by reproducing it at some point in the future, is it really learning?
Other studies have indicated that sugar affects other aspects of the mind, which typically shows up in the classroom. The knowledge that bad diet and lower test scores have gone hand in hand has existed for some time.[ii] Some of the reasons why sugar consumption have an inverse relationship, sugar goes up and scores go down, may have to do with behavioral changes, which are also linked to sugar.
In our article 141 Reasons Why Sugar is Ruining Your Health, we have made statements that “sugar can cause hyperactivity, anxiety, inability to concentrate and crankiness in children.”[iii] We also said flat out that “sugar can cause juvenile delinquency in children.”[iv]
Apparently, a child will suffer a variety of mental effects in a high-sugar environment that will feed each on other. Decreased memory retention leads to lower scores leads to acting out behavior and so the chicken and egg cycle continues until someone changes the diet.
Our recommendation at this point is some form of a whole food diet to arrest the mental decline with sugar and the modern diet. Allergies play a part in this process. It’s quite simple: stop hurting your mind and you too will find your way through the maze.
http://nancyappletonbooks.wordpress.com
[i] Ross, AP, et. al. “A High Fructose Diet Impairs Spatial Memory in Male Rats” Neurobiol Learn Mem. 2009 Jun 12. [Epub ahead of print]
[ii] Fu M.L., et al. “Associatation Between Unhealthful Eating Patterns and Unfavorable Overall School Performance in Children.” J Am Diet Assoc. 2007;107(11): 1935-1942.
[iii] Goldman, L et al. “Behavioral Effects of Sucrose on Preschool Children.” J Abnorm Child Psy. 1986; 14(4): 565-577.
[iv] Schauss, A. Diet, Crime and Delinquency. (Berkley, CA: Parker House, 1981).
Eat Less, Live Longer
July 11, 2009
Nancy Appleton PhD and G.N. Jacobs
© 2009 Nancy Appleton Books
http://nancyappletonbooks.wordpress.com
How many times did your mother tell you to eat up because kids living in a place you weren’t going to visit anyway were starving? How many times did you respond saying “why don’t you send this plate to Ethiopia?” Believe it or not, the child’s wish to not eat is sometimes more nutritionally appropriate than the mother’s position.
According to the results of a long-term rhesus monkey study from Wisconsin, modest reductions in daily calories can help primates live longer and healthier than on the normal diet. Over twenty years, the monkeys were divided into normal and reduced calorie diet groups. Apparently, 37-percent of the monkeys in the regular group had died of age-related conditions as opposed to 13-percent of the dieting group at the end of the study.
The researchers reduced the dieting monkeys’ calorie intake by 30-percent, but took steps to make sure that all necessary nutrients were still consumed. The calorie-cut monkeys didn’t just live longer they had approximately half the heart disease and cancerous tumors of the non-dieting group. Additionally, the rates of diabetes and brain atrophy, conditions associated with aging, were greatly reduced in the dieting group.[i]
We at Nancy Appleton Books applaud this research with both cheers and a “we told you so.” We have commented on food intake and other aspects of our diet making us fat, especially in our recent book Suicide by Sugar.
A sedentary lifestyle that goes from bed to work in front of a screen to entertainment in front of another screen and back to bed leads to lack of exercise, overeating and eating processed foods. The processed foods are high in sugars, especially fructose. Fructose has a way of making people feel still hungry[ii], which feeds a vicious cycle of eating more and more making people fat and unhealthy. Our position has always been to cut back on sugar and preservatives in favor of whole foods, which represents the kind of caloric reductions mentioned in the Wisconsin monkey study.
What the average person reading this article needs to know before applying a 30-percent daily calorie reduction to his or her life is what is in the monkey chow normally fed to the primates in captivity? Rhesus monkeys in the wild eat insects, fruit, worms, leaves and roots usually after exerting some energy to get the food. We have it directly from the Wisconsin researchers that the “animals ate a semi-purified, well-defined pelleted diet consisting of 15-percent protein (lactalbumin) 10-percent fat (corn oil) that also contains sucrose, corn starch, dextrin, cellulose and a vitamin and mineral mix. In addition each animal receives a piece of fresh fruit (~100 kcal) daily.”
At this point, we need to refer the reader to experiments conducted on cats by Francis Pottenger Jr. MD between 1932 and 1942 that show how the modern processed diet is in of itself a cause for alarm. Pottenger’s cats were given a diet of raw milk, cod liver and either raw meat or cooked meat. The cooked meat cats showed generations of abnormalities that left alone killed off the cat breeding after three generations and took four generations of a proper diet to heal in the cat offspring.[iii] While it is true that subsequent replication studies suggest a taurine deficiency more than cooking as the cause of the symptoms showed by Pottenger’s cats, which included heart disease, bad vision, lack of balance and wild variations in birth weight, there is some link between our diet and the symptoms we feel.[iv]
Pottenger’s cats apply to the monkey study in this way; the standard captive monkey diet already has a lot of fat, heart disease and other ailments built in. Making a 30-percent cut in this non-whole foods diet will help because a lot of sugar is being cut out and every little bit helps. More research is obviously needed to see if monkeys and humans would benefit as much from calorie reduction when they go on a diet of more whole foods than not, or if these primate studies just tell us to cut the sugar, excess carbohydrates, preservatives and other time bombs in our diet to achieve the same effect.
Another minor issue in applying the monkey study to our diet is the distressing fact that portion sizes in human meals keep increasing. Some food items, like chocolate chip cookies, increased 700-percent between 1982 and 2002.[v] We need to find out which year to use in setting an appropriate base meal size, because while any reduction from a high-calorie diet is an improvement it represents a false hope if the underlying average meal size continues to grow.
However, while there are holes left to fill concerning sugar and carbohydrates the first bit of research on overeating and longevity is in. Eating a little less without depriving yourself of nutrients will go a long way to extending your life and making you healthier. But, there are no magic pills for your health says Dr. David Finkelstein of the National Institute of Aging, a funding source for the Wisconsin study.
“Watch what you eat, keep your mind active, exercise and don’t get hit by a car,” Finkelstein says.
http://nancyappletonbooks.wordpress.com
[i] Coleman, RJ, Et. Al. “Caloric Restriction Delays Disease Onset and Mortality in Rhesus Monkeys” Science 325;(5937): 201-204.
[ii] Tannous, dit El Khoury D. et. al. “Variations in Postprandial Ghrelin Status Following Ingestion of High-Carbohydrate, High-Fat and High-Protein Meals in Males.” Annals of Nutritional Metabolism. 50(3): 260-9 Feb 2006.
[iii] Pottenger, F. M. Jr. Pottenger’s Cats (1983, Price Pottenger Nutrition Foundation, La Mesa CA.).
[iv] Beyond Vegetarianism. ”Lesson of the Pottenger’s Cats
Experiment: Cats are not Humans.” http://www.beyondveg.com/tu-j-l/raw-cooked/raw-cooked-1h.shtml. Viewed July 10, 2009.
[v] American Journal of Public Health. Feb 2002;92(2):247.
It Hurts Down There: Vulvodynia
July 9, 2009
Nancy Appleton PhD and G.N. Jacobs
© 2009 Nancy Appleton Books
http://nancyappletonbooks.wordpress.com
Doctors just love giving medical conditions fancy names with Latin roots to make us tremble when they give the diagnosis. Vulvodynia is one such word. Derived from vulva (a key part of the female anatomy) and dynamo (an active, irrepressible machine or energy source), the word translates to plain English as the poor woman has a lot of chronic pain down there.
The condition typically presents with stinging, burning and/or itching sensations that can really zap a woman’s sense of wellbeing. If men put great store in their virility and testosterone production (see article), then vulvodynia is one female equivalent that results in less sex, depression, low self-esteem and a general hit to quality of life from not exercising or riding bikes to avoid the pain. One estimate says that 14 million women in the U.S. and up to 16-percent worldwide have this condition, which is not contagious, nor is it related in any way to sexually transmitted disease.
Is there a cure or treatment? Mainstream medicine has been slow to come up with a definitive answer. In 2006, a researcher at the University of Michigan wrote an article that gives an overview of the symptoms and many treatments available once a woman is diagnosed with vulvodynia.
One condition of the diagnosis requires that a woman have the pain without the usual suspect – Candida Albicans (yeast infection) – being present. Doctors poke and swab and find nothing under the microscope. So, the article meanders through discussions of nerve sensitivity, cognitive behavior therapy and pelvic floor muscles. However, there are some interesting tidbits for the holistic minded in that several key phrases common to Dr. Appleton’s work popped up: inflammation, immune system, allergies and diet.[i]
The first question to ask is did this researcher overlook Candida as a cause simply because it couldn’t be found on a microscope slide? Can the yeast infection change form and continue to cause pain in women after the topical ointment has killed off the infection, which typically is found on the surface?
Obviously, we’re asking the question like a lawyer, we already knew the answer to be yes. According to Marjorie Crandall, vulvodynia is caused in many cases by a Candida infection seeping through tissues and cell membranes. The infection becomes dormant in terms of growth, but continues to irritate causing pain.[ii]
So if Candida can cause vulvodynia, what causes Candida? Again we knew the answer: allergies and sugar. We will refer to our article 141 Reasons Why Sugar is Ruining Your Health – Sugar assists the uncontrolled growth of Candida Albicans.[iii]
Dr. Crandall suggests that the treatments and prevention regime for Candida is what is required for vulvodynia only switching out the topical antifungal creams for a systemic antifungal taken orally to make sure the patient gets the yeast that has entered her vulva and vagina. She also notes that allergies play a role in the development of symptoms saying, “Some women notice that their symptoms worsen 12 to 72 hours after eating certain foods.”[iv]
Other researchers have noted a high correlation between yeast and other symptoms of allergies meaning that people who have one seem to have the other. A study from Brazil showed that 71-percent of the Candida group also had allergic rhinitis (classical nasal allergy symptoms like runny nose and watery eyes).[v]
Most information about Candida says that prevention includes a diet free of sugar, alcohol, coffee and refined carbohydrates along with removing anything that can change the woman’s hormone balance like birth control pills and antibiotics.[vi] For women who specifically have vulvodynia as opposed to regular Candida on the surface, further dietary recommendations include going on the Low Oxalate Diet originally indicated for kidney stones.
Foods to avoid completely on the Low Oxalate Diet: spinach, rhubarb, beets, strawberries, nuts, chocolate, tea, coffee, cola and wheat bran.
Foods to limit: White corn grits, wheat germ, whole-wheat flour, berries, concord grapes, red currants, Damson plums, citrus peels, tangerines, fruity deserts, baked beans in tomato sauce, peanut butter, tofu, sweet potatoes, vegetable soup without vegetables, beans, dark leafy greens (swiss chard, endive, escarole, parsley), eggplant, leeks, summer squash and draft beer.
Your health care professional will have the last word on what you should remove from your diet to heal vulvodynia or kidney stones for that matter.
We have talked about sugar and allergies as seemingly separate causes of vulvodynia, but Dr. Appleton has always asserted that allergies are also the result of too much sugar in the diet. The very first statement in 141 Reasons is sugar can suppress the immune system.[vii] Sugar depletes minerals that make hormones work and said hormones are part of the immune system’s proper functioning. An allergy is merely a precursor response that can later develop into whatever disease comes next, because the immune system fights off the food allergy instead of the rapidly growing Candida.
Sugar causes everything and vulvodynia is but one more example.
http://nancyappletonbooks.wordpress.com
[i] Reed, BD “Vulvodynia: Diagnosis and Management” Am Fam Physician 2006;73:1231-8, 1239.
[ii] Crandall, M “Allergic Predisposition and Recurrent Vulvovaginal Candidiasis” Journal of Advancement in Medicine, Spring 1991;4(1):21-38.
[iii] Crook, W. J. The Yeast Connection. (TN: Professional Books, 1984).
[iv] Crandall, M “Allergic Predisposition and Recurrent Vulvovaginal Candidiasis” Journal of Advancement in Medicine, Spring 1991;4(1):21-38.
[v] Moraes, PS “Recurrent Vaginal Candidiasis and Allergic rhinitis: A Common Association” Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 1998 Aug;81(2):165-9.
[vi] http://www.empowher.com/media/reference/vaginal-yeast-infection#prevention viewed July 9, 2009
[vii] Sanchez, A, et al. “Role of Sugars in Human Neutrophilic Phagocytosis.” Am J Clin Nutr. Nov 1973; 261: 1180-1184.
141 Reasons Sugar Ruins Your Health
July 3, 2009
(Just Kidding, it’s 143)
By Nancy Appleton PhD & G.N. Jacobs
Excerpted from Suicide by Sugar
Used with permission
- Sugar can suppress your immune system.
- Sugar upsets the mineral relationships in the body.
- Sugar can cause juvenile delinquency in children.
- Sugar eaten during pregnancy and lactation can influence muscle force production in offspring, which can affect an individual’s ability to exercise.
- Sugar in soda, when consumed by children, results in the children drinking less milk.
- Sugar can elevate glucose and insulin responses and return them to fasting levels slower in oral contraceptive users.
- Sugar can increase reactive oxygen species (ROS), which can damage cells and tissues.
- Sugar can cause hyperactivity, anxiety, inability to concentrate and crankiness in children.
- Sugar can produce a significant rise in triglycerides.
10. Sugar reduces the body’s ability to defend against bacterial infection.
11. Sugar causes a decline in tissue elasticity and function – the more sugar you eat, the more elasticity and function you lose.
12. Sugar reduces high-density lipoproteins (HDL).
13. Sugar can lead to chromium deficiency.
14. Sugar can lead to ovarian cancer.
15. Sugar can increase fasting levels of glucose.
16. Sugar causes copper deficiency.
17. Sugar interferes with the body’s absorption of calcium and magnesium.
18. Sugar may make eyes more vulnerable to age-related macular degeneration.
19. Sugar raises the level of neurotransmitters: dopamine, serotonin, and norepinephrine.
20. Sugar can cause hypoglycemia.
21. Sugar can lead to an acidic digestive tract.
22. Sugar can cause a rapid rise of adrenaline levels in children.
23. Sugar is frequently malabsorbed in patients with functional bowel disease.
24. Sugar can cause premature aging.
25. Sugar can lead to alcoholism.
26. Sugar can cause tooth decay.
27. Sugar can lead to obesity.
28. Sugar increases the risk of Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis.
29. Sugar can cause gastric or duodenal ulcers.
30. Sugar can cause arthritis.
31. Sugar can cause learning disorders in school children.
32. Sugar assists the uncontrolled growth of Candida Albicans (yeast infections).
33. Sugar can cause gallstones.
34. Sugar can cause heart disease.
35. Sugar can cause appendicitis.
36. Sugar can cause hemorrhoids.
37. Sugar can cause varicose veins.
38. Sugar can lead to periodontal disease.
39. Sugar can contribute to osteoporosis.
40. Sugar contributes to saliva acidity.
41. Sugar can cause a decrease in insulin sensitivity.
42. Sugar can lower the amount of Vitamin E in the blood.
43. Sugar can decrease the amount of growth hormones in the body.
44. Sugar can increase cholesterol.
45. Sugar increases advanced glycation end products (AGEs), which form when sugar binds non-enzymatically to protein.
46. Sugar can interfere with the absorption of protein.
47. Sugar causes food allergies.
48. Sugar can contribute to diabetes.
49. Sugar can cause toxemia during pregnancy.
50. Sugar can lead to eczema in children.
51. Sugar can cause cardiovascular disease.
52. Sugar can impair the structure of DNA.
53. Sugar can change the structure of protein.
54. Sugar can make the skin wrinkle by changing the structure of collagen.
55. Sugar can cause cataracts.
56. Sugar can cause emphysema.
57. Sugar can cause atherosclerosis.
58. Sugar can promote an elevation of low-density lipoproteins (LDL).
59. Sugar can impair the physiological homeostasis of many systems in the body.
60. Sugar lowers enzymes ability to function.
61. Sugar intake is associated with the development of Parkinson’s disease.
62. Sugar can increase the size of the liver by making the liver cells divide.
63. Sugar can increase the amount of liver fat.
64. Sugar can increase kidney size and produce pathological changes in the kidney.
65. Sugar can damage the pancreas.
66. Sugar can increase the body’s fluid retention.
67. Sugar is the number one enemy of the bowel movement.
68. Sugar can cause myopia (nearsightedness).
69. Sugar can compromise the lining of the capillaries.
70. Sugar can make tendons more brittle.
71. Sugar can cause headaches, including migraines.
72. Sugar plays a role in pancreatic cancer in women.
73. Sugar can adversely affect children’s grades in school.
74. Sugar can cause depression.
75. Sugar increases the risk of gastric cancer.
76. Sugar can cause dyspepsia (indigestion).
77. Sugar can increase the risk of developing gout.
78. Sugar can increase the levels of glucose in the blood much higher than complex carbohydrates in a glucose tolerance test can.
79. Sugar reduces learning capacity.
80. Sugar can cause two blood proteins – albumin and lipoproteins – to function less effectively, which may reduce the body’s ability to handle fat and cholesterol.
81. Sugar can contribute to Alzheimer’s disease.
82. Sugar can cause platelet adhesiveness, which causes blood clots.
83. Sugar can cause hormonal imbalance – some hormones become underactive and others become overactive.
84. Sugar can lead to the formation of kidney stones.
85. Sugar can cause free radicals and oxidative stress.
86. Sugar can lead to biliary tract cancer.
87. Sugar increases the risk of pregnant adolescents delivering a small-for-gestational-age (SGA) infant.
88. Sugar can lead to a substantial decrease the in the length of pregnancy among adolescents.
89. Sugar slows food’s travel time through the gastrointestinal tract.
90. Sugar increases the concentration of bile acids in stool and bacterial enzymes in the colon, which can modify bile to produce cancer-causing compounds and colon cancer.
91. Sugar increases estradiol (the most potent form of naturally occurring estrogen) in men.
92. Sugar combines with and destroys phosphatase, a digestive enzyme, which makes digestion more difficult.
93. Sugar can be a risk factor for gallbladder cancer.
94. Sugar is an addictive substance.
95. Sugar can be intoxicating, similar to alcohol.
96. Sugar can aggravate premenstrual syndrome (PMS).
97. Sugar can decrease emotional stability.
98. Sugar promotes excessive food intake in obese people.
99. Sugar can worsen the symptoms of children with attention deficit disorder (ADD).
- Sugar can slow the ability of the adrenal glands to function.
- Sugar can cut off oxygen to the brain when given to people intravenously.
- Sugar is a risk factor for lung cancer.
- Sugar increases the risk of polio.
- Sugar can cause epileptic seizures.
- Sugar can increase systolic blood pressure (pressure when the heart is contracting).
- Sugar can induce cell death.
- Sugar can increase the amount of food that you eat.
- Sugar can cause antisocial behavior in juvenile delinquents.
- Sugar can lead to prostate cancer.
- Sugar dehydrates newborns.
- Sugar can cause women to give birth to babies with low birth weight.
- Sugar is associated with a worse outcome of schizophrenia.
- Sugar can raise homocysteine levels in the bloodstream.
- Sugar increases the risk of breast cancer.
- Sugar is a risk factor in small intestine cancer.
- Sugar can cause laryngeal cancer.
- Sugar induces salt and water retention.
- Sugar can contribute to mild memory loss.
- Sugar water, when given to children shortly after birth, results in those children preferring sugar water to regular water throughout childhood.
- Sugar causes constipation.
- Sugar can cause brain decay in pre-diabetic and diabetic women.
- Sugar can increase the risk of stomach cancer.
- Sugar can cause metabolic syndrome.
- Sugar increases neural tube defects in embryos when it is consumed by pregnant women.
- Sugar can cause asthma.
- Sugar increases the chances of getting irritable bowl syndrome.
- Sugar can affect central reward systems.
- Sugar can cause cancer of the rectum.
- Sugar can cause endometrial cancer.
- Sugar can cause renal (kidney) cell cancer.
- Sugar can cause liver tumors.
- Sugar can increase inflammatory markers in the bloodstreams of overweight people.
- Sugar plays a role in the cause and the continuation of acne.
- Sugar can ruin the sex life of both men and women by turning off the gene that controls the sex hormones.
- Sugar can cause fatigue, moodiness, nervousness, and depression.
- Sugar can make many essential nutrients less available to cells.
- Sugar can increase uric acid in blood.
- Sugar can lead to higher C-peptide concentrations.
- Sugar causes inflammation.
- Sugar can cause diverticulitis, a small bulging sac pushing outward from the colon wall that is inflamed.
- Sugar can decrease testosterone production.
- Sugar impairs spatial memory.
- Sugar can cause cataracts.
Citations:
1. Sanchez, A, et al. “Role of Sugars in Human Neutrophilic Phagocytosis.” Am J Clin Nutr. Nov 1973; 261: 1180-1184.
2. Bernstein, L et al. “Depression of Lymphocyte Transformation Following Oral Glucose Ingestion.” Am J Clin Nutr. 1997; 30: 613.
3. Schauss, A. Diet, Crime and Delinquency. (Berkley, CA: Parker House, 1981).
4. Bayol, S.A “Evidence that a Maternal ‘Junk Food’ Diet during Pregnancy and Lactation Can Reduce Muscle Force in Offspring.” Eur J Nutr. Dec 19, 2008.
5. Rajeshwari, R, et al. “Secular Trends in Children’s Sweetened-beverage Consumption (1973 to 1994): The Bogalusa Heart Study.” J Am Diet Assoc. Feb 2005; 105(2): 208-214.
6. Behall, K. “Influence of Estrogen Content of Oral Contraceptives and Consumption of Sucrose on Blood Parameters.” Disease Abstracts International. 1982; 431-437. POPLINE Document Number: 013114.
7. Mohanty, P., et al. “Glucose Challenge Stimulates Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) Generation by Leucocytes.” J Clin Endocrin Metab. Aug 2000; 85(8): 2970-2973.
Couzy, F., et al. “Nutritional Implications of the Interaction Minerals.” Progressive Food & Nutrition Science. 1933; 17: 65-87.
8. Goldman, L et al. “Behavioral Effects of Sucrose on Preschool Children.” J Abnorm Child Psy. 1986; 14(4): 565-577.
9. Scanto, S. and Yudkin, J. “The Effect of Dietary Sucrose on Blood Lipids, Serum Insulin, Platelet Adhesiveness and Body Weight in Human Volunteers.” Postgrad Med J. 1969; 45: 602-607.
10. Ringsdorf, w., Cheraskin, E., and Ramsay. R “Sucrose, Neutrophilic Phagocytosis and Resistance to Disease.” Dental Survey. 1976; 52(12): 46-48.
11. Cerami, A, et al. “Glucose and Aging.” Scientific American. May 1987: 90.
Lee, A T. and Cerami, A “The Role of Glycation in Aging.” Annals N Y Acad Sci. 663: 63-67.
12. Albrink, M. and Ullrich, LH. “Interaction of Dietary Sucrose and Fiber on Serum Lipids in Healthy Young Men Fed High Carbohydrate Diets.” Clin Nutr. 1986;43: 419-428.
Pamplona, R, et al. “Mechanisms of Glycation in Atherogenesis.” Medical Hypotheses. Mar 1993; 40(3): 174-81.
13. Kozlovsky, A, et al. “Effects of Diets High in Simple Sugars on Urinary Chromium Losses.” Metabolism. Jun 1986; 35: 515-518.
14. Takahashi, E. Tohoku, University School of Medicine. Wholistic Health Digest. Oct 1982: 41.
15. Kelsay, L et al. “Diets High in Glucose or Sucrose and Young Women.” Am J Clin Nutr. 1974; 27: 926-936.
Thomas, B. L et al. “Relation of Habitual Diet to Fasting Plasma Insulin Concentration and the Insulin Response to Oral Glucose.” Hum Nutr Clin Nutr. 1983; 36C(1): 49-51.
16. Fields, M., et al. “Effect of Copper Deficiency on Metabolism and Mortality in Rats Fed Sucrose or Starch Diets.” Am J Clin Nutr. 1983; 113: 1335-1345.
17. Lemann, J. “Evidence that Glucose Ingestion Inhibits Net Renal Tubular Reabsorption of Calcium and Magnesium.” Am J Clin Nutr. 1976; 70: 236-245.
18. Chiu, C. “Association between Dietary Glycemic Index and Age-related Macular Degeneration in Nondiabetic Participants in the Age-Related Eye Disease Study.” Am J Clin Nutr. Jul 2007; 86: 180-188.
19. “Sugar, White Flour Withdrawal Produces Chemical Response.” The Addiction Letter. Jul1992: 4.
20. Dufty, William. Sugar Blues. (New York: Warner Books, 1975).
21. Ibid.
22. Jones, T.W., et al. “Enhanced Adrenomedullary Response and Increased Susceptibility to Neuroglygopenia: Mechanisms Underlying the Adverse Effect of Sugar Ingestion in Children.” J Ped. Feb 1995; 126: 171-177.
23. Ibid.
24. Lee, A. T. and Cerami, A. “The Role of Glycation in Aging.” Annals NY Acad Sci. 1992; 663: 63-70.
25. Abrahamson, E. and Peget, A. Body, Mind and Sugar. (New York: Avon, 1977).
26. Glinsmann, w., et al. “Evaluation of Health Aspects of Sugar Contained in Carbohydrate Sweeteners.” FDA Report of Sugars Task Force. 1986: 39.
Makinen, K.K., et al. “A Descriptive Report of the Effects of a 16-month Xylitol Chewing-Gum Programme Subsequent to a 40-Month Sucrose Gum Programme.” Caries Res. 1998; 32(2): 107-12.
Riva Touger-Decker and Cor van Loveren, “Sugars and Dental Caries.” Am J Clin Nutr. Oct 2003; 78: 881-892.
27. Keen, H., et al. “Nutrient Intake, Adiposity and Diabetes.” Brit Med J. 1989; 1: 655-658.
28. Tragnone, A, et al. “Dietary Habits as Risk Factors for Inflammatory Bowel Disease.” Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. Jan 1995; 7(1): 47-51.
29. Yudkin, J. Sweet and Dangerous. (New York: Bantam Books: 1974) 129.
30. Darlington, L., and Ramsey. et al. “Placebo-Controlled, Blind Study of Dietary Manipulation Therapy in Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Lancet. Feb 1986; 8475(1): 236-238.
31. Schauss, A. Diet, Crime and Delinquency. (Berkley, CA: Parker House, 1981).
32. Crook, W. J. The Yeast Connection. (TN: Professional Books, 1984).
33. Heaton, K. “The Sweet Road to Gallstones.” Brit Med J. Apr 14, 1984; 288: 1103-1104.
Misciagna, G., et al. “Insulin and Gallstones.” Am J Clin Nutr. 1999; 69: 120-126.
34. Yudkin, J. “Sugar Consumption and Myocardial Infarction.” Lancet. Feb 6, 1971; 1(7693): 296-297.
Chess, D.J., et al. “Deleterious Effects of Sugar and Protective Effects of Starch on Cardiac Remodeling, Contractile Dysfunction, and Mortality in Response to Pressure Overload.” Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. Sep 2007; 293(3): H1853-H1860.
35. Cleave, T. The Saccharine Disease. (New Canaan, CT: Keats Publishing, 1974).
36. Ibid.
37. Cleave, T. and Campbell, G. Diabetes, Coronary Thrombosis and the Saccharine Disease. (Bristol, England: John Wright and Sons, 1960).
38. Glinsmann, W., et al. “Evaluation of Health Aspects of Sugar Contained in Carbohydrate Sweeteners.” F.D.A. Report of Sugars Task Force. 1986; 39: 36-38.
39. Tjiiderhane, L. and Larmas, M. “A High Sucrose Diet Decreases the Mechanical Strength of Bones in Growing Rats.” J Nutr. 1998; 128: 1807-1810.
40. Wilson, RE and Ashley, EP. “The Effects of Experimental Variations in Dietary Sugar Intake and Oral Hygiene on the Biochemical Composition and pH of Free Smooth-surface and Approximal Plaque.” J Dent Res. Jun 1988; 67(6): 949-953.
41. Beck-Nielsen, H., et al. “Effects of Diet on the Cellular Insulin Binding and the Insulin Sensitivity in Young Healthy Subjects.” Diabetes. 1978; 15: 289-296.
42. Mohanty, P., et al. “Glucose Challenge Stimulates Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) Generation by Leucocytes.” J Clin Endocrin Metab. Aug 2000; 85(8): 2970-2973.
43. Gardner, L. and Reiser, S. “Effects of Dietary Carbohydrate on Fasting Levels of Human Growth Hormone and Cortisol.” Proc Soc Exp Bioi Med. 1982; 169: 36-40.
44. Ma, Y, et al. “Association Between Carbohydrate Intake and Serum Lipids.” J Am Coli Nutr. Apr 2006; 25(2): 155-163.
45. Furth, A and Harding, J. “Why Sugar Is Bad For You.” New Scientist. Sep 23, 1989; 44.
46. Lee, AT. and Cerami, A “Role of Glycation in Aging.” Annals N Y Acad Sci. Nov 21,1992; 663: 63-70.
47. Appleton, N. Lick the Sugar Habit. (New York: Avery Penguin Putnam, 1988).
48. Henriksen, H. B. and Kolset, S.O. Tidsslcr Nor Laegeforen. Sep 6, 2007; 127(17): 2259-62.
49. Cleave, T. The Saccharine Disease. (New Canaan, CT: Keats Publishing, 1974).
50. Ibid., at 132.
51. Vaccaro, 0., et al. “Relationship of Postload Plasma Glucose to Mortality with 19 Year Follow-up.” Diabetes Care. Oct 15,1992; 10: 328-334.
Tominaga, M., et al, “Impaired Glucose Tolerance Is a Risk Factor for Cardiovascular Disease, but Not Fasting Glucose.” Diabetes Care. 1999; 2(6): 920-924.
52. Lee, A T. and Cerami, A “Modifications of Proteins and Nucleic Acids by Reducing Sugars: Possible Role in Aging.” Handbook of the Biology of Aging. (New York: Academic Press, 1990).
53. Monnier, V. M. “Nonenzymatic Glycosylation, the Maillard Reaction and the Aging Process.” J Ger. 1990; 45(4): 105-110.
54. Dyer, D. G., et al. “Accumulation of Maillard Reaction Products in Skin Collagen in Diabetes and Aging.” J Clin Invest. 1993; 93(6): 421-422.
55. Veromann, S., et al. “Dietary Sugar and Salt Represent Real Risk Factors for Cataract Development.” Ophthalmologica. Jul-Aug 2003; 217(4): 302-307.
56. Monnier, V. M. “Nonenzymatic Glycosylation, the Maillard Reaction and the Aging Process.” J Ger. 1990; 45(4): 105-110.
57. Schmidt, AM., et al. “Activation of Receptor for Advanced Glycation End Products: a Mechanism for Chronic Vascular Dysfunction in Diabetic Vasculopathy and Atherosclerosis.” Circ Res. Mar 1999; 1984(5): 489-97.
58. Lewis, G. F. and Steiner, G. “Acute Effects of Insulin in the Control of VLDL Production in Humans. Implications for The Insulin-resistant State.” Diabetes Care. Apr 1996; 19(4): 390-393.
R. Pamplona, M.J., et al. “Mechanisms of Glycation in Atherogenesis.” Medical Hypotheses. 1990; 40: 174-181.
59. Ceriello, A “Oxidative Stress and Glycemic Regulation.” Metabolism. Feb 2000; 49(2 Suppl1): 27-29.
60. Appleton, Nancy. Lick the Sugar Habit. (New York: Avery Penguin Putnam, 1988).
61. Hellenbrand, W., et al. “Diet and Parkinson’s Disease. A Possible Role for the Past Intake of Specific Nutrients. Results from a Self-administered Food-frequency Questionnaire in a Case-control Study.” Neurology. Sep 1996; 47: 644-650.
Cerami, A, et al. “Glucose and Aging.” Sci Am. May 1987: 90.
62. Goulart, F. S. “Are You Sugar Smart?” American Fitness. Mar-Apr 1991: 34-38.
63. Scribner, K.B., et al. “Hepatic Steatosis and Increased Adiposity in Mice Consuming Rapidly vs. Slowly Absorbed Carbohydrate.” Obesity. 2007; 15: 2190-2199.
64. Yudkin, L Kang, S., and Bruckdorfer, K. “Effects of High Dietary Sugar.” Brit Med J. Nov 22, 1980; 1396.
65. Goulart, F. S. “Are You Sugar Smart?” American Fitness. Mar-Apr 1991: 34-38
66. Ibid.
67. Ibid.
68. Ibid.
69. Ibid.
70. Nash, J. “Health Contenders.” Essence. Jan 1992; 23: 79-81.
71. Grand, E. “Food Allergies and Migraine.” Lancet. 1979; 1: 955-959.
72. Michaud, D. “Dietary Sugar, Glycemic Load, and Pancreatic Cancer Risk in a Prospective Study.” J Natl Cancer Inst. Sep 4, 2002; 94(17): 1293-300.
73. Schauss, A. Diet, Crime and Delinquency. (Berkley, CA: Parker House, 1981).
74. Peet, M. “International Variations in the Outcome of Schizophrenia and the Prevalence of Depression in Relation to National Dietary Practices: An Ecological Analysis.” Brit J Psy. 2004; 184: 404-408.
75. Cornee, L et al. “A Case-control Study of Gastric Cancer and Nutritional Factors in Marseille, France.” Eur J Epid. 1995; 11: 55-65.
76. Yudkin, J. Sweet and Dangerous. (New York: Bantam Books, 1974).
77. Ibid., at 44.
78. Reiser, S., et al. “Effects of Sugars on Indices on Glucose Tolerance in Humans.” Am J Clin Nutr. 1986: 43; 151-159.
79. Ibid.
Molteni, R, et al. “A High-fat, Refined Sugar Diet Reduces Hippocampal Brainderived Neurotrophic Factor, Neuronal Plasticity, and Learning.” NeuroScience. 2002; 112(4): 803-814.
80. Monnier, v., “Nonenzymatic Glycosylation, the Maillard Reaction and the Aging Process.” J Ger. 1990; 45: 105-111.
81. Frey, J. “Is There Sugar in the Alzheimer’s Disease?” Annales De Biologie Clinique. 2001; 59(3): 253-257.
82. Yudkin, J. “Metabolic Changes Induced by Sugar in Relation to Coronary Heart Disease and Diabetes.” Nutr Health. 1987; 5(1-2): 5-8.
83. Ibid.
84. Blacklock, N.J., “Sucrose and Idiopathic Renal Stone.” Nutr Health. 1987; 5(1-2):9-12.
Curhan, G., et al. “Beverage Use and Risk for Kidney Stones in Women.” Ann Inter Med. 1998; 28: 534-340.
85. Ceriello, A “Oxidative Stress and Glycemic Regulation.” Metabolism. Feb 2000; 49(2 Suppl1): 27-29.
86. Moerman, C. L et al. “Dietary Sugar Intake in the Etiology of Biliary Tract Cancer.” Inter J Epid. Apr 1993; 2(2): 207-214.
87. Lenders, C. M. “Gestational Age and Infant Size at Birth Are Associated with Dietary Intake among Pregnant Adolescents.” J Nutr. Jun 1997; 1113-1117.
88. Ibid.
89.Yudkin, J. and Eisa, O. “Dietary Sucrose and Oestradiol Concentration in Young Men.” Ann Nutr Metab. 1988; 32(2): 53-55.
90. Bostick, RM., et al. “Sugar, Meat, and Fat Intake and Non-dietary Risk Factors for Colon Cancer Incidence in Iowa Women.” Cancer Causes & Control. 1994; 5: 38-53.
Kruis, w., et al. “Effects of Diets Low and High in Refined Sugars on Gut Transit, Bile Acid Metabolism and Bacterial Fermentation.” Gut. 1991; 32: 367-370.
Ludwig, D. S., et al. “High Glycemic Index Foods, Overeating, And Obesity.” Pediatrics. Mar 1999; 103(3): 26-32.
91. Yudkin, J. and Eisa, O. “Dietary Sucrose and Oestradiol Concentration in Young Men.” Ann Nutr Metab. 1988; 32(2): 53-55.
92. Lee, AT. and Cerami, A “The Role of Glycation in Aging.” Annals N Y Acad Sci. 1992; 663: 63-70.
93. Moerman, c., et al.”Dietary Sugar Intake in the Etiology of Gallbladder Tract Cancer.” Inter J Epid. Apr 1993; 22(2): 207-214.
94. Avena, N.M. “Evidence for Sugar Addiction: Behavioral and Nuerochemical Effects of Intermittent, Excessive Sugar Intake.” Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2008; 32(1): 20-39.
Colantuoni, c., et al. “Evidence That Intermittent, Excessive Sugar Intake Cause Endogenous Opioid Dependence.” Obesity. Jun 2002; 10(6): 478-488.
95. Ibid.
96. The Edell Health Letter. Sep 1991; 7: 1.
97. Christensen, L., et al. “Impact of A Dietary Change on Emotional Distress.” J Abnorm Psy. 1985; 94(4): 565-79.
98. Ludwig, D.S., et al. “High Glycemic Index Foods, Overeating and Obesity.” Pediatrics. Mar 1999; 103(3): 26-32.
99. Girardi, N.L.” Blunted Catecholamine Responses after Glucose Ingestion in Children with Attention Deficit Disorder.” Pediatr Res. 1995; 38: 539-542.
Berdonces, J.L. “Attention Deficit and Infantile Hyperactivity.” Rev Enferm. Jan 2001; 4(1): 11-4.
100. Lechin, E, et al. “Effects of an Oral Glucose Load on Plasma Neurotransmitters in Humans.” Neuropsychobiology. 1992; 26(1-2): 4-11.
101. Arieff, AI. “IVs of Sugar Water Can Cut Off Oxygen to the Brain.” Veterans Administration Medical Center in San Francisco. San Jose Mercury. Jun 12/86.
102. De Stefani, E. “Dietary Sugar and Lung Cancer: a Case Control Study in Uruguay.” Nutr Cancer. 1998; 31(2): 132-7.
103. Sandler, B.P. Diet Prevents Polio. (Milwakuee, WI: The Lee Foundation for Nutr Research,1951).
104. Murphy, P. “The Role of Sugar in Epileptic Seizures.” Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients. May 2001.
105. Stern, N. and Tuck, M. “Pathogenesis of Hypertension in Diabetes Mellitus.” Diabetes Mellitus, a Fundamental and Clinical Test. 2nd Edition. (Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2000) 943-957.
Citation Preuss, H.G., et al. “Sugar-Induced Blood Pressure Elevations Over the Lifespan of Three Substrains of Wistar Rats.” J Am Coli Nutr. 1998; 17(1): 36-37.
106. Christansen, D. “Critical Care: Sugar Limit Saves Lives.” Science News. Jun 30, 2001; 159: 404.
Donnini, D., et al. “Glucose May Induce Cell Death through a Free Radicalmediated Mechanism.” Biochem Biophys Res Commun. Feb 15, 1996; 219(2): 412-417.
107. Levine, AS., et al. “Sugars and Fats: The Neurobiology of Preference” J Nutr. 2003; 133: 831S-834S.
108. Schoenthaler, S. “The Los Angeles Probation Department Diet-Behavior Program: Am Empirical Analysis of Six Institutional Settings.” Int J Biosocial Res. 5(2): 88-89.
109. Deneo-Pellegrini H., et al. “Foods, Nutrients and Prostate Cancer: a Casecontrol Study in Uruguay.” Br J Cancer. May 1999; 80(3-4): 591-7.
110. “Gluconeogenesis in Very Low Birth Weight Infants Receiving Total Parenteral Nutrition.” Diabetes. Apr 1999; 48(4): 791-800.
111. Lenders, C. M. “Gestational Age and Infant Size at Birth Are Associated with Dietary Intake Among Pregnant Adolescents.” J Nutr. 1998; 128: 807-1810.
112. Peet, M. “International Variations in the Outcome of Schizophrenia and the Prevalence of Depression in Relation to National Dietary Practices: An Ecological Analysis.” Brit J Psy. 2004; 184: 404-408.
113. Fonseca, v., et al. “Effects of a High-fat-sucrose Diet on Enzymes in Homosysteine Metabolism in the Rat.” Metabolism. 2000; 49: 736-41.
114. Potischman, N., et al. “Increased Risk of Early-stage Breast Cancer Related to Consumption of Sweet Foods Among Women Less than Age 45 in the United States.” Cancer Causes & Control. Dec 2002; 13(10): 937-46.
115. Negri, E., et al. “Risk Factors for Adenocarcinoma of the Small Intestine.” Int J Cancer. Jul1999; 2(2): 171-4.
116. Bosetti, c., et al. “Food Groups and Laryngeal Cancer Risk: A Case-control Study from Italy and Switzerland.” Int J Cancer. 2002; 100(3): 355-358.
117. Shannon, M. “An Empathetic Look at Overweight.” CCL Family Found. NovDec 1993; 20(3): 3-5. POPLINE Document Number: 091975.
118. Harry, G. and Preuss, MD, Georgetown University Medical School. http://www.usa.weekend.com/food/carper_archive/961201carper_eatsmart.html.
119. Beauchamp, G.K., and Moran, M. “Acceptance of Sweet and Salty Tastes in 2-year-old Children.” Appetite. Dec 1984; 5(4): 291-305.
120. Cleve, T.L. On the Causation of Varicose Veins. (Bristol, England: John Wright, 1960).
121. Ket, Yaffe, et al. “Diabetes, Impaired Fasting Glucose and Development of Cognitive Impairment in Older Women.” Neurology. 2004; 63: 658-663.
122. Chatenoud, Liliane, et al. “Refined-cereal Intake and Risk of Selected Cancers in Italy.” Am J Clin Nutr. Dec 1999; 70: 1107-1110.
123. Yoo, Sunmi, et al. “Comparison of Dietary Intakes Associated with Metabolic Syndrome Risk Factors in Young Adults: the Bogalusa Heart Study.” Am J Clin Nutr. Oct 2004; 80(4): 841-848.
124. Shaw, Gary M., et al. “Neural Tube Defects Associated with Maternal Periconceptional Dietary Intake of Simple Sugars and Glycemic Index.” Am J Clin Nutr. Nov 2003; 78: 972-978.
125. Powers, L. “Sensitivity: You React to What You Eat.” Los Angeles Times. Feb 12, 1985.
Cheng, L et al. “Preliminary Clinical Study on the Correlation Between Allergic Rhinitis and Food Factors.” Lin Chuang Er Bi Yan Hou Ke Za Zhi. Aug 2002; 16(8): 393-396.
126. Jarnerot, G. “Consumption of Refined Sugar by Patients with Crohn’s Disease, Ulcerative colitis, or Irritable Bowel Syndrome.” Scand J Gastroenterol. Nov 1983; 18(8): 999-1002.
127. Allen, S. “Sugars and Fats: The Neurobiology of Preference.” J Nutr. 2003; 133: 831S-834S.
128. De Stefani, E., et al. “Sucrose as a Risk Factor for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum: a Case-control Study in Uruguay.” Int J Cancer. Jan 5, 1998; 75(1): 40-4.
129. Levi, E, et al. “Dietary Factors and the Risk of Endometrial Cancer.” Cancer. Jun 1, 1993; 71(11): 3575-3581.
130. Mellemgaard, A, et al. “Dietary Risk Factors for Renal Cell Carcinoma in Denmark.” Eur J Cancer. Apr 1996; 32A(4): 673-82.
131. Rogers, AE., et al. “Nutritional and Dietary Influences on Liver Tumorigenesis in Mice and Rats.” Arch Toxicol Suppl. 1987; 10: 231-43. Review.
132. Sorensen, L.B., et al. “Effect of Sucrose on Inflammatory Markers in Overweight Humans” Am J Clin Nutr. Aug 2005; 82(2).
133. Smith, R.N., et al. “The Effect of a High-protein, Low Glycemic-load Diet Versus a Conventional, High Glycemic-load Diet on Biochemical Parameters Associated with Acne Vulgaris: A Randomized, Investigator-masked, Controlled TriaL” JAm Acad Dermatol. 2007; 57: 247-256.
134. Selva, D.M., et al. “Monosaccharide-induced Lipogenesis Regulates the Human Hepatic Sex Hormone-binding Globulin Gene.” J Clin Invest. 2007. doi:10.1172/JCI32249.
135. Krietsch, K., et al. “Prevalence, Presenting Symptoms, and Psychological Characteristics of Individuals Experiencing a Diet-related Mood-disturbance.” Behavior Therapy. 1988; 19(4): 593-604.
136. Berglund, M., et al. “Comparison of Monounsaturated Fat with Carbohydrates as a Replacement for Saturated Fat in Subjects with a High Metabolic Risk Profile: Studies in the Fasting and Postprandial States.” Am J Clin Nutr. Dec 1, 2007; 86(6): 1611-1620.
137. Gao, X., et al. “Intake of Added Sugar and Sugar-Sweetened Drink and Serum Uric Acid Concentration in US Men and Women.” Hypertension. Aug 1, 2007; 50(2): 306-312.
138. Wu, T., et al. Fructose, Glycemic Load, and Quantity and Quality of Carbohydrate in Relation to Plasma C-peptide Concentrations in US Women.” Am J Clin Nutr. Oct 2004; (4):1043-1049.
139. Matthias, B. and Schulze, M.B. “Dietary Pattern, Inflammation, and Incidence of Type 2 Diabetes in Women.” Am J Clin Nutr. Sep 2005; 82: 675-684.
140. Yudkin, J. Sweet and Dangerous. (New York: Bantam Books: 1974) 169.
141. http://www.endo-society.org/media/press/upload/CARONIA_FINAL.pdf dated June 13, 2009
142. Ross, AP, et. al. “A High Fructose Diet Impairs Spatial Memory in Male Rats” Neurobiol Learn Mem. 2009 Jun 12. [Epub ahead of print]
143. Gul, A. et al. “Role of fructose concentration on cataractogenesis in senile diabetic and non-diabetic patients.” Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2009 Jun;247(6):809-14. Epub 2009 Feb 6.
http://nancyappletonbooks.wordpress.com
Thoughts Heal (or Not)
June 29, 2009
Nancy Appleton PhD and G.N. Jacobs
Authors of Suicide by Sugar
© 2009 Nancy Appleton Books
http://nancyappletonbooks.wordpress.com
Can your thoughts and perceptions about your world, your body and your genetics affect how you get sick or, more importantly, well? Considering the number of articles dealing with alternate approaches to cancer and other diseases the answer is yes.
Most of this new research has been lumped into a field called epigenetics, which means Above Genetics in science speak. The term refers to heritable changes in gene expression that occur without changing the underlying DNA sequence. Do our genes control our lives or does our environment have a role to play? Until recently, DNA was destiny.
Epigenetic inheritance has been documented many times by Israeli researchers in many types of animals, whether fruit flies growing protrusions on eyes in response to chemicals or giraffes growing their necks by stretching out for food. These researchers spent most of their time explaining one of these processes – DNA methylation in which methyls act as a switch that turns genes on and off, changing gene expression but not the genes. One example of this process occurs during tissue differentiation where an organism begins with one jack-of-all-trades cell and finishes with muscles, nerves, skin and other organs. If changes happen in this process, then the genetic expressions can be permanent and be passed onto future generations.[i]
The primary epigenetic statement is that your environment affects your genes and by extension, your health. Your diet is clearly part of this environment. Dr. Appleton’s own nutritional research, that essentially says SUGAR KILLS, shows that people get sick in high-sugar environments and that genes only determine how we get sick. Someone with cancer in the family will get cancer when they put themselves in a get sick environment.[ii] We also stated that the reverse is true, the person in a get healthy environment will be healthy regardless of his or her genes.
Since we come to the debate from the nutrition corner, we couldn’t resist another dig at our modern diet courtesy of researchers at Newcastle University. They say in their conclusions to research on dietary effects on fetal epigenetic programming that “There is now proof of principle that maternal diet can have a profound impact on the epigenome (combined genetic and epigenetic state of a cell) and so determine gene expression patterns and health throughout the life-course.”[iii]
We really like beating sugar into the ground. An international study on diabetes found that high sugar conditions cause epigenetic changes in patients that last for quite some time after blood sugar levels returned to normal.[iv]
We must write of Francis Pottenger, Jr., MD, who researched 3 generations of cats between 1932 and 1942. Pottenger fed cats 2/3rd raw meat, 1/3 raw milk and cod liver oil over three generations and saw healthy cats that could reproduce healthy liters. From generation to generation they maintained a regular, broad face, broad dental arches and regular teeth fully developed internal organs, fur of good quality with little shedding, were all similar in size and happy cats.
Cats that were fed 2/3 cooked meat, 1/3 raw milk and cod liver old reproduced kittens of indifferent sizes in the same litter. These kittens had heart problems, nearsightedness and farsightedness, underactivity or inflammation of the thyroid gland, inflammation in the joints and many other irregularities. By the time the third deficient generation is born, the cats are so physiologically bankrupt that none survive beyond the sixth month of life, thereby terminating the strain.
When the cats of the first and second generation cooked meat fed groups were returned to a raw meat diet, they are classified as regenerating animals of the first and second orders. Their progeny were then maintained on an optimum diet to measure the time needed to rebuild their health to that of the normal cats. It required approximately four generations for either order to regenerate to a state of normal health.[v]
In another Pottenger experiment, cats were fed condensed milk, which of course has sugar in it. This sweetened condensed milk developed much heavier fat deposits and exhibited severe skeletal deformities in the cats. They showed extreme irritability and paced back and forth in their pens nervously. A recent review of the cat study based on subsequent similar studies pinpoint a deficiency in the amino acid taurine, which seems to respond badly to overheating, as an explanation of what Dr. Pottenger found in the original experiments.[vi]
These long-term studies certainly show that diet over generations plays an immense role in the health of newborns and in adult cats. The term epigenetics had not been coined when Pottenger was doing his research, but the follow up studies published recently do fit into epigentics because they describe various environmental factors like amino acid deficiencies as affecting health.
Another common arena for epigenetic changes to happen is a mother’s womb. A recent study at the University of Utah shows that poor nutrition on the part of the mother affects the offspring to favor such diseases like diabetes, obesity and cardiovascular disease. The researchers studied two groups of rats, a control group and a reduced fetal nutrition group that mirrored what human mothers experience when diagnosed with a condition called Preeclampsia.
Preeclampsia occurs during pregnancy and immediately after birth and is characterized by such symptoms as high blood pressure, edema, various pains, headaches nausea, vision changes and shortness of breath. Preeclampsia kills quite a few women (76,000) and babies (500,000) every year. Common remedies for a pregnant woman include bed rest, regular prenatal checkups and better nutrition to include no sugar, few processed foods, no caffeine and no alcohol.[vii]
So, it seems that the Preeclampsia advocacy groups have artfully skirted the direct statement that these elements of our bad diet cause the condition to avoid excessive interference from Big Sugar. But, getting back to the rat study, the nutritional conditions of the rodent fetuses were meant to mimic the conditions of a human mother and child with the disorder where nutrients are cut off to the fetus. The offspring of the bad nutrition group were smaller at birth and far more susceptible to disease throughout their lives. This was explained with the mechanism of the IGF-1 protein, which wasn’t significantly present in the small, diseased rats, a permanent genetic change.[viii]
“The jury’s in and, yes, expectant moms really are eating for two,” says Gerald Weissmann, MD, Editor-in-Chief of the journal publishing the article.
Now many articles about epigenetics don’t include studies that specifically state thoughts heal. These articles are mostly about the interplay of genes, environmental factors and diet that affects which genes are expressed as healthy traits and which are simply a major malady waiting to happen. But, some do speak to the effects of the mind on health; typically we call this a placebo effect.
Placebos in normal medical usage are sugar pills given to some participants of medical trials in order to test the new medicine against doing nothing. But, doctors have noticed that in these trials some patients taking the placebo improve as well. The patient who is not told that he or she is in the control group believes the smiling doctor in the lab coat and gets better. Could this effect explain spontaneous remission of cancer? Is there an opposite to the placebo that kills us? It’s called a nocebo and recent research says that such negative thoughts and beliefs can kill.
According to the recent works of Bruce Lipton, the answer to all of the above is yes. In a series of YouTube videos, Dr. Lipton demonstrates that life results from proteins reacting to external stimuli. He states that the placebo is our positive beliefs and the nocebo is our negative thoughts. He also shows that we have perception filters that sit between what really happens in the environment and how we perceive them. Thus regardless of what really happened a person with a negative response will go into Fight or Flight mode, which shuts down the growth and reproduction systems in favor of protection systems. This is the same when deciding to run from a tiger or yell at the blockhead boss who ruined our weekend with a stack of work. A stressor will then choose genetic expressions that make the most sense in the here and now and some of these can make us sick.[ix]
What this means for your health is this, you become responsible. We bought the gene theory and we became victims. We stopped looking for environmental causes whether it was our diet changing the sugar content of our cells or our thoughts and beliefs getting in the way of our health. We program ourselves to be victims. Perception becomes belief and cells react to these changes in the same way it would react to less sunlight, by changing genes. Curiously the beliefs of others are also part of the problem; negativity around us also affects our environment, because our beliefs form in response to those around us. According to Dr. Lipton the only limitations are on the environment, which limits perception.
Dr. Appleton has always included the psychological as part of her health plan. People who need to get well are given a food plan and told to evaluate how they reacted to the stress that is naturally part of life. Many do not want to hear this. They want to hear about nutrition. What food you put into your mouth, what words come out of your mouth, what you think and what you feel are all important. It is a holistic approach.
We would like to paraphrase something Bruce Pacetti DDS said to us, “If you’re a Nazi, you’d better darn well live with other Nazis, because your views will be wildly divergent from anyone else and this stress may make you ill.”
http://nancyappletonbooks.wordpress.com
[i] Jablonka et al. “Transgenerational Epigenetic Inheritance: Prevalence, Mechanisms, and Implications for the Study of Heredity and Evolution.” The Quarterly Review of Biology, 2009; 84 (2): 131
[ii] Appleton, Nancy Lick the Sugar Habit (1996 Avery Press, New York)
[iii] Mathers JC, McKay JA “Epignetics – Potential Contribution to Fetal Programming” Adv Exp Med Biol. 2009;646:119-23.
[iv] El-Osta, A et al. “Transient high glucose causes persistent epigenetic changes and altered gene expression during subsequent normoglycemia” J. Exp. Med. 205 (10) 2409-2417.
[v] Pottenger, F. M. Jr. Pottenger’s Cats, (1983, Price Pottenger Nutrition Foundation, La Mesa CA.).
[vi] Beyond Vegetarianism. ”Lesson of the Pottenger’s Cats
Experiment: Cats are not Humans.” http://www.beyondveg.com/tu-j-l/raw-cooked/raw-cooked-1h.shtml. Viewed July 10, 2009.
[vii] http://www.preeclampsia.org/about.asp viewed 8/13/09
[viii] Qi Fu, et al. “Epigenetics: intrauterine growth retardation (IUGR) modifies the histone code along the rat hepatic IGF-1 gene.” FASEB 2009 J. doi:10.1096/fj.08-124768 http://www.fasebj.org/cgi/content/abstract/fj.08-124768v1
[ix] Lipton, Bruce “Biology of Perception Pts. 1-7” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLZ7GqWpEqM&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuJdVdArDgc&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0iU_QcU4o4&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wy3arcY0KlQ&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-jh9UCy1Fk&NR=1
