Irradiated meat - Safety concern

Safety concern: That exposing food to radiant energy to control spoilage and microorganisms might causes a loss of vitamins and have unknown long-term health effects.

When: In 1997 the FDA approved the use of irradiation for red meat and meat products, while opponents said more studies needed to be done.

Consumers are justifiably wary of foods bombarded with nuclear waste or powerful x-rays or gamma rays--since irradiation destroys essential vitamins and nutrients, creates unique radiolytic chemical compounds never before consumed by humans, and generates carcinogenic byproducts such as formaldehyde and benzene.

Although irradiation, except for spices, is banned in much of the world, and prohibited globally in organic production, U.S. corporate agribusiness and the meat industry desperately want to be able to secretly "nuke" foods in order to reduce the deadly bacterial contamination that is now routine in industrial agriculture and meat production.

Why: The FDA and meat producers said irradiation would help reduce the bacteria that causes food poisoning, but opponents pointed to studies linking irradiated meat to elevated levels of cancer. The FDA requires that irradiated foods sold in stores be marked and carry the international symbol for irradiation. But some supermarkets, such as Whole Foods Markets, are reluctant to carry irradiated meat and other irradiated products.

Genetically modified foods - Safety concern

Safety concern: That long-term potential risks to the environment and human health are unknown.

When: A Boston College professor dubbed genetically modified crops "Frankenfood" in a 1992 New York Times letter to the editor, responding to the FDA's decision to exempt them from case-by-case review. In 1994, tomatoes became the first genetically engineered whole product to go on the market.

Why: The FDA found that genetically engineered tomatoes were as safe as other tomatoes, but not without protest from environmental and consumer groups like the Pure Food Campaign.

The FDA has evaluated more than 50 bioengineered foods it has found as safe as their conventional food counterparts. But the European Union has not approved a genetically modified crop in 10 years, although escalating food prices have led some countries to reconsider their stance on genetically modified crops, which are often resistant to disease and produce high yield rates.

Probiotics - Health Benefits

Probiotics are bacteria that are found naturally in the digestive systems of human beings. They have positive effects on health as they improve the functions of the gastrointestinal tract. Probiotics affect, among other things, the body’s ability to extract nutrition and protect against infections. In the Western World, the amounts of ‘good’ bacteria have diminished due to changes in diet and life styles leading to an increase risk of infection and other negative medicinal effects.

Some of the suggested effects of probiotic supplementation that have been observed include:

– Increased nutritional value (better digestibility,
increased absorption of minerals and vitamins)
– Promotion of intestinal lactose digestion
– Positive influence on the intestinal microflora
(antibiotics or radiation included colitis)
– Prevention of intestinal tract infections
– Regulation of gut motility
– Positive influence on gastrointestinal disorders
– Improvement of the immune system
– Prevention of arteriosclerosis by reduction of serum cholesterol
– Prevention of osteoporosis
– Improved well-being

Glycogen

Glycogen is the form of sugar that is stored in the muscles for quick energy. Not only is this the fuel that gets us started, but it sustains us for the first half hour of exercise. Unfortunately, when this form of sugar is used for exercise, it leaves behind a lot of waste product. Running too fast at the beginning of a workout depletes valuable glycogen as it fills up the muscles and slows them down. This is why many runners don’t feel great during the first few miles of a run. The faster the starting pace, the more uncomfortable they feel. Most of this discomfort can be eliminated with a slow start and more frequent, or longer, early walk breaks – in short, a better warm-up.

The supply of glycogen is very limited, and it is necessary for brain function. A small amount of this “muscle sugar” is burned every mile, even after you’ve shifted primarily into fat-burning. So it’s very important on long runs to conserve this resource by keeping the pace very slow from the beginning. When supplies run low, your “energy control” will hold back enough for your most crucial organ and force a breakdown of fat and protein – a very uncomfortable process. You’ll avoid this negative effect by gradually increasing your distance, by putting in more walk breaks from the beginning, and by running at least three days a week (regularity of exercise).

In power of vitamin D, hope for a new disease fighter

In a Newark laboratory, researchers watch as mice stricken with multiple sclerosis suddenly walk. They peer into microscopes and see the growth of breast cancer cells dramatically slowed.


They are examining, up close, the power of vitamin D.

"We're believers," said Sylvia Christakos, a longtime vitamin researcher at UMDNJ-New Jersey Medical School.

Many others are following. A spate of provocative studies shows the potential health benefits of vitamin D on everything from breast, prostate and colon cancer to auto- immune disorders such as Type I diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, lupus and multiple sclerosis.

The so-called "sunshine vitamin" may even protect the heart.

Some researchers, citing widespread vitamin D deficiencies among Americans, call current federal guidelines outdated and argue most people need far more of the nutrient than they get from food, multi-vitamins and the sun.

Others say more research is needed before Americans start downing supplements or exposing unprotected skin to height-of-the- day sun, whose ultraviolet rays help create the vitamin.

Few researchers, however, have studied the nutrient more closely than Christakos.

"There is finally more of a recognition of the value of vitamin D to prevent various diseases," she said. "But it's cheap and over-the-counter so you won't turn on the television and see commercials pushing vitamin D."

In a review scheduled for publi cation this week in the online Journal of Cellular Biochemistry, Christakos and her team conclude proper blood levels of vitamin D can protect people from multiple sclerosis. The review said the nutrient may help maintain balance in the immune system.

The team looked at MS in mice, and found those treated early with an active form of vitamin D improved dramatically. The stricken mice, once paralyzed, were able to walk, though Christakos said that does not mean the same will happen for people with MS.

The lab has gone a step further to show how vitamin D may work on a genetic level. Working with researchers from Stanford University, they showed how vitamin D likely inhibits a key inflammatory response involved in MS.

The data on vitamin D is accumulating. For example:

A Canadian study found women with breast cancer were nearly twice as likely to see their cancer spread, and far more likely to die, if deficient in the vitamin.

A 2007 study in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition concluded improving calcium and vitamin D levels substantially reduces all cancer risk in post-menopausal women.

In last year's New England Journal of Medicine, researcher Michael F. Holick of Boston University School of Medicine cited a study that found elderly French women given 1,200 mg of calcium and 800 international units (IU) of vitamin D daily for three years reduced their risk of hip fracture by 43 percent.

Holick cited another study that found women who took more than 400 IU of vitamin D had a 42 percent reduced risk of developing multiple sclerosis. Another study found that 10,366 Finnish children who were given 2,000 IU of vitamin D per day during their first year of life and were followed for 31 years had their risk of developing Type I diabetes reduced by 80 percent.

Holick said Americans should take at least 1,000 IU of vitamin D daily as well as a multivitamin with another 400 IU. Christakos said vitamin D supplements are especially important for those at risk of immune disorders, such as siblings of people with Type I diabetes or MS.

Government guidelines, however, recommend just 200 IU for those under 50; 400 for those 51-70; and 600 for those over 70.

Jennifer Koentop, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, said the government is negotiating with the Institute of Medicine, a national advisory organization, to review the vitamin D guidelines.

Humans once routinely absorbed vitamin D from the sun, but when jobs and society moved in doors exposure to sunlight dropped. Holick estimates half of all Americans are vitamin D defi cient. Deficiency rates among African-Americans may be higher.

Reinhold Veith, a researcher at the University of Toronto, said people can safely put on a bathing suit and expose much of their skin, without sunscreen, for as little as five minutes several times a week to obtain vitamin D.

Most dermatologists disagree, however. The American Academy of Dermatology, on its website, said people who want additional vitamin D should use supplements to prevent skin cancer and damage.

Debate continues over supplements, too. Laura Byham-Gray, associate professor of nutritional sciences at the UMDNJ-School of Health Related Professions, does not recommend higher doses.

"What we consider a vitamin D deficiency is still under debate," she said. She cites the hype that once surrounded vitamin E, which researchers later learned actually increased mortality.

Vitamin D proponents said as much as 10,000 IU daily will not cause toxicity.

"Policy makers want a high level of evidence before committing themselves," Veith said. "But all the accumulating evidence on vita min D has been like a slow rising sun. When do you call it daytime?"