Marc Joseph Nutrition - Blog

Did you know that many toxic wastes are “recycled” into fertilizer and spread on land used to grow food? I didn’t before reading an interesting book, Fateful Harvest: The True Story of a Small Town, a Global Industry, and a Toxic Secret, written by Duff Wilson, formerly a reporter for The Seattle Times and nominated for a Pulitzer Prize for his newspaper series that preceded the book.

The book tells the story through the experience of Patty Martin, the mayor of Quincy, a small farming town located in central Washington state. After several farmers experience unexpected crop failures, a horse breeder’s animals mysteriously die eating locally-grown feed, and people in the town begin developing unexplained chronic illnesses, Martin and a small group of other residents trace the effects to the local Cenex fertilizer distributor. Cenex had disposed of toxic waste (heavy metals, pesticides, and other unidentified materials) stored in a large rinsing pond on its property by mixing it with fertilizer sold to local farmers.

However, as Martin and the others soon learn, the practice of recycling toxic waste into fertilizer, was (and still is) not limited to Quincy. It’s a nationwide, and even worldwide, practice. In fact, recycling of toxic waste into fertilizer …

(more…)

Last month, I had a post discussing the importance of ensuring adequate levels of both folic acid and vitamin B12 to help prevent cognitive decline:

Key Nutrients in Helping to Prevent Cognitive Decline

In a new study out this month in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, researchers evaluated 1779 Mexican Americans between the ages of 60 and 101, and found that those individuals with high homocysteine levels and low vitamin B12 levels were at significantly greater risk of developing dementia.

Specifically, study participants with high homocysteine levels had more than double (139%) the risk of developing dementia than individuals with normal homocysteine values. And, participants whose serum vitamin B12 levels were in the lowest third of those measured had more than 60 percent greater risk of dementia.

Vitamin B12 is used in the primary pathway conversion of homocysteine back to methionine in the methylation cycle. (Betaine, or tri-methyl-glycine, is used in the secondary pathway converting homocysteine to methionine.) Methylation reactions are fundamental to many cellular processes, including expression of genes and proteins. Without adequate vitamin B12 intake, absorption, and utilization, homocysteine levels rise and the methylation cycle is impaired.

Vitamin B12 is also critically important in the methylation reactions involved in the proper formation of myelin, the “insulation” that coats nerve cells and is necessary for proper communication between them.

An interesting note about this study is that the researchers found a significant negative relationship between vitamin B12 and dementia (low vitamin B12, high dementia risk) looking only at serum vitamin B12 levels. That’s certainly one measure of potential deficiency, but a more reliable approach would be to measure methylmalonic acid (MMA), which builds up when vitamin B12 is low and is a sensitive, early deficiency marker. Your best bet for assessing vitamin B12 deficiency is to look at serum vitamin B12, MMA, and homocysteine levels in aggregate, rather than just relying on one measure.

Vitamin deficiencies (e.g., vitamin B12, folate) may be involved in dementia and cognitive decline, but they are not the only potential causes. For more on other contributing factors, see here.

In a recent epidemiological study of rural Chinese seniors, researchers found that lower selenium levels in nail samples were associated with lower cognitive scores.

Specifically, researchers observed that people in the group with the 20% lowest selenium levels scored 10 years older on a standardized cognitive test than people with the 20% highest selenium levels.

Selenium is an essential trace mineral — meaning you only need very small amounts of it (micrograms - mcgs, or millionths of a gram) and have to get it from your diet or through supplements. Selenium may also be toxic in higher amounts (e.g., more than 400 mcg/day), so this is a case where a lot more is not better.

The mineral plays very important roles in the body, such as inclusion in key enzymes:

• Glutathione peroxidases, which help one of the body’s primary antioxidants (glutathione) to neutralize free radical molecules.
• Thyroid hormone deiodinases, which help convert inactive thyroid hormone T4 into the biologically active form T3, among other functions.

Selenium may help to reduce the risk of certain cancers (e.g., prostate, colon), improve immune function, and lower the risk of cardiovascular disease (via reduced oxidative damage to the arterial walls). Also, selenium appears to sequester, although not chelate, mercury.

Brazil nuts are the food highest in selenium (potentially > 100 mcg per nut, depending on the soil). Organ meats and seafood are also high in selenium. Selenium levels in grains and plant foods can vary greatly depending on the soil in which they are grown. Here’s an (old) map that shows soil selenium levels in North America.

As the authors of the study above note, it’s important to realize that the effects of selenium deficiency likely occur over a long period. Selenium supplementation is not a quick fix. Including a reasonable amount of selenium (e.g, 200 mcg/day) in a well-utilized form (e.g., selenomethionine) as part of a preventive program started well before cognitive decline symptoms appear makes the most sense.

A few years ago, investigative reporter and former BBC producer Christopher Bryson wrote an excellent book (The Fluoride Deception) detailing the story behind the use of fluoride in drinking water. Here’s an excerpt from Publishers Weekly’s book description:

Bryson marshals an impressive amount of research to demonstrate fluoride’s harmfulness, the ties between leading fluoride researchers and the corporations who funded and benefited from their research, and what he says is the duplicity with which fluoridation was sold to the people. The result is a compelling challenge to the reigning dental orthodoxy, which should provoke renewed scientific scrutiny and public debate.

It’s an eye-opening read. Definitely worth the time.

Here’s an interesting video interview with the author discussing some of the book’s findings:

Also, be sure to check out the earlier post (ADA Issues Fluoride Alert for Infants & Children) that discusses the issue of fluorosis and provides links to more background on the potential hazards regarding excessive fluoride exposure.

As mentioned in that post, chronic exposure to elevated fluoride levels may be associated with greater risk of bone cancer, as well as detrimental health effects on the teeth, kidneys, brain, thyroid gland, pineal gland, and more.

A quick update on the HPV (human papilloma virus) vaccine (GARDASIL), which some states, such as Texas, are now considering requiring for all adolescent girls.

The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), the nation’s leading vaccine safety and informed consent advocacy organization, has openly questioned both the risks and costs of the HPV vaccine:

“GARDASIL safety appears to have been studied in fewer than 2,000 girls aged 9 to 15 years pre-licensure clinical trials and it is unclear how long they were followed up. VAERS [Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System] is now receiving reports of loss of consciousness, seizures, arthritis and other neurological problems in young girls who have received the shot,” said NVIC President Barbara Loe Fisher. “At the same time, parents who take their daughters to private pediatricians are going to be shocked to find that they will be paying two to three times the widely publicized $360 cost for the three-dose series.

NVIC also notes how the HPV vaccine is being given by some doctors at the same time as other vaccines, despite no research to suggest that this practice is safe:

VAERS reports also indicate the doctors are administering GARDASIL to girls and women at the same with Tdap, DT, meningococcal (Menactra), hepatitis A, and other vaccines, even though the Merck product insert states that, with the exception of hepatitis B vaccine, “Co-administration of GARDASIL with other vaccines has not been studied.”

Certainly, cervical cancer is a terrible disease, but, as discussed in an earlier post, shouldn’t more research go into potential interactions between the various vaccine antigens? Why rush into adding another required vaccine, especially since cervical cancer rates have fallen dramatically because of routine pap smears?

There has been a more than 70 percent drop in cervical cancer deaths in American women since the 1950’s due to routine pap smears and nearly all cervical cancers can be prevented with regular pap smear screening and treatment.

Merck, the manufacturer of GARDASIL, even acknowledges the effectiveness of screening and notes it should not be stopped after vaccination:

In its product manufacturer insert, Merck states that “Vaccination does not substitute for routine cervical cancer screening. Women who receive GARDASIL should continue to undergo cervical cancer screening per standard of care.” Merck also states that “The duration of immunity following a complete schedule of immunization with GARDASIL has not been established.”

Something doesn’t seem quite right …

In a recent study published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, researchers found that higher levels of vitamin A intake were associated with lower rates of gastric cancer.

Specifically, researchers, in an observational cohort study, looked at vitamin A consumption through both food and supplements, and noted that:

[H]igh intakes of vitamin A and retinol from foods only (dietary intake) and from foods and supplements combined (total intake) and of dietary alpha-carotene and beta-carotene were associated with a lower risk of gastric cancer.

The reduction in gastric cancer risk ranged from 45 to 50 percent.

Vitamin A - Forms & Functions

There are three biologically active forms of vitamin A:

• retinal
• retinol
• retinoic acid

Retinal is primarily derived from beta-carotene, one of the plant pigments (carotenoids) found in foods such as carrots, spinach, yams, etc. It can be converted in the body into retinol in a reversible reaction and into retinoic acid in an irreversible reaction. Retinal plays an important role in vision.

Retinol is found only in animal products, such as liver, cod liver oil, and milk. It can also be created through conversion from retinal in a reversible reaction. Retinol plays important roles in reproduction and growth.

Retinoic acid is derived from retinal in an irreversible reaction and plays important roles in gene expression and growth.

Suspected Vitamin A Role in Gastric Cancer

Vitamin A (primarily retinoic acid and retinol) is key in controlling cell differentiation and proliferation, two activities that go awry in cancer. Vitamin A helps to:

• control protein synthesis and differentiation of epithelial cells that line the body’s surfaces, such as the skin and the linings of the mouth, stomach, and intestines.
• regulate differentiation of goblet cells that produce mucus that coats and protects the epithelial cells from both bacteria and potentially harmful substances, such as gastric juices.

Vitamin A also influences immune system function, and helps to ensure proper T-cell response and natural killer cell activity, both critical in helping to prevent cancer from developing.

Clearly, it’s important to ensure adequate intake of all vitamin A forms, from both food and potentially supplements, to help reduce gastric cancer risk.

Even more research evidence just out reinforcing the importance of adequate vitamin D levels for avoiding the development of breast and colon cancers.

In the first paper published in the Journal of Steroid Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, researchers pooled data from two previous studies and found that individuals with the highest vitamin D levels (greater than 50 ng/mL) had one-half the risk of developing breast cancer versus individuals with the lowest vitamin D levels (less than 10 ng/mL).

“The data were very clear, showing that individuals in the group with the lowest blood levels had the highest rates of breast cancer, and the breast cancer rates dropped as the blood levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D increased,” said study co-author Cedric Garland, Dr.P.H. “The serum level associated with a 50 percent reduction in risk could be maintained by taking 2,000 international units of vitamin D3 daily plus, when the weather permits, spending 10 to 15 minutes a day in the sun.”

In the second paper published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine, researchers found that individuals with the highest vitamin D levels had the lowest colon cancer risk.

“Through this meta-analysis we found that raising the serum level of 25-hydroxyvitamin D to 34 ng/ml would reduce the incidence rates of colorectal cancer by half,” said co-author Edward D. Gorham, Ph.D. “We project a two-thirds reduction in incidence with serum levels of 46ng/ml, which corresponds to a daily intake of 2,000 IU of vitamin D3. This would be best achieved with a combination of diet, supplements and 10 to 15 minutes per day in the sun.”

Sources

The primary source of vitamin D is sunshine (UVB rays) hitting the skin, converting cholesterol-based molecules there into a molecule called cholecalciferol, which is then converted by two more reactions in the liver and kidneys into the final, active form of vitamin D (calcitriol).

Interestingly, researchers have learned in recent years that the final conversion that takes place in the kidneys can also take place in other cells in the body, such as breast, colon, prostate, and skin cells, four cell types that are prone to cancer.

Food is a poor source of vitamin D. Only fortified dairy really contains significant amounts, and then, only about 100 IU in an 8 oz. glass of milk. Not much.

If you get vitamin D through sun exposure, you want to avoid getting too much exposure and damaging the skin. You don’t want the skin to change color. 10 to 15 minutes per day of noontime sun on a clear day three or four times a week for a fair-skinned person should be fine. Dark-skinned people need significantly more exposure, e.g., 25 to 30 minutes exposure each time out.

In Northern latitudes during the winter months, the sun isn’t strong enough to generate adequate vitamin D, even during mid-day sun. Supplementation is the preferred source.

Getting 2000 IU/day of vitamin D through supplementation is both easy and inexpensive (less than $15 a year). As long as people aren’t getting regular, significant sun, such an intake level year-round is likely to be safe and promote healthful vitamin D levels that may:

• reduce the risk for several types of cancer
• improve calcium utilization and bone density
• strengthen immunity and reduce susceptibility to the flu

As the evidence continues to mount, last month’s appeal by leading researchers for an increase in the vitamin D upper intake level, as well as higher daily recommended intake levels for optimal health, needs to be taken seriously.

In a recent study published in the journal Neuropediatrics, researchers observed that higher blood mercury levels were significantly associated with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD).

Specifically, the case control study examined 52 children with ADHD (44 boys, mean age=7) along with a control group. Researchers found:

• significantly greater blood mercury levels in the children with ADHD than the control group (18.2 vs. 11.6 nmol/L)
• that children with blood mercury levels greater than 29 nmol/L (27% of the children studied) had nearly 10 times the risk of having ADHD

Mercury is not the only heavy metal associated with ADHD. As mentioned in an earlier blog post (One-third of ADHD Cases May be Tied to Lead, Smoking), lead exposure may also be a potential cause.

Whether mercury, lead, or another heavy metal may be involved, it’s important to use an appropriate diagnostic test. A blood test is not necessarily a good choice. Heavy metals tend to clear from the blood over the course of several months. So, if exposure to heavy metals is in large, infrequent doses (e.g., through a vaccine preservative), a blood test wouldn’t necessarily reveal an elevated level unless the test were done right after the exposure.

Also, even if the exposure were low-level and chronic (e.g., mercury fillings, fish consumption), blood levels may not be high. The blood test, though, doesn’t tell you anything about what amount of metals are being retained by the body’s tissues and organs — and that’s what you really care about most.

A challenge test using a chelation substance, like DMSA, is sometimes used to try get a better understanding of tissue levels. But it’s not accurate either. The test may tell you that you have high metal levels, but a negative test result doesn’t necessarily mean that you have low levels. It just means that the chelation substance didn’t pull any metals with that challenge dose. Think of it like a miner going into mine in search of gold. He scrapes the walls for a bit and finds no gold. Does that mean there’s no gold in the mine? Mmmm, no.

A better test for chronic, long-term heavy metal exposure or acute exposures that occurred more than a couple of months ago is a hair test. This test can help to reveal disordered essential mineral transport, which is a hallmark sign of heavy metal toxicity. The heavy metals displace and disrupt the normal use of essential minerals in the body (e.g., zinc, magnesium, calcium, etc.), including the deposition of these minerals into the hair.

You can read more about approaches for dealing with heavy metal toxicity and ADHD here and here.

From the January 1, 2007 issue of American Family Physician (AAFP):

2007 Childhood and Adolescent Immunization Schedules - Evolution or Intelligent Design?

“The first childhood immunization schedule was released in 1983 and provided guidance to physicians as to which of the four vaccines recommended at the time (i.e., diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and pertussis [DTP], oral poliovirus vaccine [OPV], measles, mumps, and rubella [MMR], and tetanus and diphtheria toxoid [Td]) to administer at each of seven age ranges (i.e., two, four, six, 15, and 18 months, four to six years, and 14 to 16 years). All told, a child born in 1983 would receive 11 vaccine doses between birth and 18 years of age…

…The recommended schedule continues to provide guidance to busy physicians. Today, American children receive 39 recommended vaccine doses by age 18, a 3.5-fold increase over the past 25 years. This explosion of antigens has been associated with a 6.3-fold increase in vaccination-related costs. The estimated 1983 private market cost for one child to receive all recommended vaccines was $254 (adjusted to present day, excluding administrative costs); this amount has grown to $1,601 ($1,744 when optional annual influenza vaccine is added for children six to 18 years of age).2 The vaccine cost alone to fully immunize each U.S. birth cohort (approximately 4 million children) is an estimated $6.4 billion.”

PDF of the 2007 Recommended Child Immunization Schedule

Concerns

Evolution or Intelligent Design? Are those our only two choices?

11 vaccine doses in 1983 vs. 39 doses today. Wow.

I’m not necessarily anti-vaccine. There are some pretty terrible diseases out there (e.g., polio). However, that sure is an amazing increase in antigen exposure over a very short period of time.

My health concerns are two-fold:

1. The cumulative toxin exposure, e.g.:

• Ethyl mercury in the preservative thimerosal, which is still used in 90% of all flu vaccines for children and adults, as well as in other adult vaccines, such as tetanus/diphtheria booster shots. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) still does NOT recommend mercury-free shots to either pregnant women or children, despite the fact that a mercury-containing flu shot has 50,000 ppb mercury, while liquid with only 200 ppb is considered hazardous waste by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
• Aluminum hydroxide, a common adjuvant (immune stimulant) added to vaccines, which is linked to Gulf War Illness and causes motor neuron death in mice.

2. The potential immune system imbalances created by both the increased number of vaccine antigens injected into young children and the interactions between them.

Financial Incentives

As noted above in the AAFP article excerpt, the pharmaceutical industry’s financial incentives for expanding vaccination schedules are significant. $254 in revenue per child in 1983 vs. $1,601 today.

This recent article in the LA Times describes the “renaissance” in vaccine development:

Breakthroughs in technology, increased funding and higher profits are spurring a boom in vaccine discovery and development that could save or improve the lives of millions of people by attacking such scourges as cancer and malaria …

… “It’s clear there is a renaissance going on around vaccines,” said Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. “We have made more progress with some [vaccines] in the past few years than we have in the past 30.” …

… Perhaps the best evidence of a vaccine revival is that the pharmaceutical industry is returning to the market …

… Overall, the number of vaccines in development has risen from 285 in 1996 to 450 today.

Drug executives say they can charge considerably more for today’s vaccines — up to several hundred dollars or more — versus a few dollars for older vaccines.

Might financial incentives and political influence be driving the introduction of some of these vaccines?:

Texas Governor orders anti-cancer vaccine

“Perry has ties to Merck and Women in Government. One of the drug company’s three lobbyists in Texas is Mike Toomey, Perry’s former chief of staff. His current chief of staff’s
mother-in-law, Texas Republican state Rep. Dianne White Delisi, is a state director for Women in Government.

The governor also received $6,000 from Merck’s political action committee during his re-election campaign.”

Bottom Line

I’d like to see greater study into the potential interaction between the different vaccine antigens and the effects on the immune system. Creating products that help most people with the risk of potential harm to a small subset of people doesn’t seem like such a good bet when you’re one of the people in the small subset.

With autism and developmental disorders continuing to skyrocket (record numbers in California in 2006 — a topic I’ll cover in a separate future post), we need to better understand the potential risks created by these greatly expanded vaccination schedules.

In this blog, I regularly raise the topic of vaccines and potential toxin and immune injury. The reasoning is that:

1. These injuries affect potentially millions of people in both acute and subclinical ways, with effects that may last lifetimes.
2. The emotional and financial costs of helping family members deal with these illnesses are extremely high.
3. Nutritional and other biomedical interventions can play a significant role in helping people to heal and recover.