Coffee is more than just a comforting ritual or a pick-me-up. It’s one of the most widely consumed beverages worldwide. And while many of us reach for it as a morning pick-me up, coffee actually supports long-term health in surprisingly powerful ways.
Tag: longevity
-
I Risked Everything to Build My Company. Four Years Later, Here’s What I’ve Learned About Building Real, Lasting Success | Entrepreneur
Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.
When I first moved to the United States, my goal was simple: survive. I had no connections, little understanding of the system, and a burning desire to build something meaningful. At 33, I shared my journey here — how I used grit, education and a bit of luck to launch a real estate tech startup built on transparency.
Four years later, I’m still standing — but I’ve changed. So has my definition of success.
Today, I’m the founder and CEO of a growing real estate tech company based in New York City. But how I run my business — and how I live — looks completely different from when I started. I’ve learned that building something sustainable takes more than hustle. It requires alignment, clarity, and the courage to evolve.
These are the five lessons I wish I’d known sooner. They now form the foundation of how I lead and advise others.
1. Stop chasing the finish line
Early on, I thought success meant scaling fast, raising capital and staying in the spotlight. But sprinting toward a vague goal is a recipe for burnout.
Now, I prioritize rhythm over speed. My weeks are structured around deep work, reflection and meaningful conversations. Sustainable growth isn’t linear — it’s iterative. Whether you’re building a business or navigating a career shift, ask yourself: What version of success feels good to live, not just good to post?
Start your week with a “clarity session.” List your top three priorities — both for your business and your wellbeing. If your calendar doesn’t reflect those, you’re running someone else’s race.
2. Your business should serve your life — not the other way around
For a while, my business ran me. Every client issue, notification and small win or loss dictated my emotions. I was reactive, and my personal life paid the price.
Now, I see my company as a vehicle for the life I want to lead. I’ve built systems that support autonomy, hired people who don’t need micromanaging and created workflows that don’t require 24/7 attention.
Design your business — or your career — backwards. Start by defining the lifestyle you want, then build your work structure around it. This mindset shift made me a more present human and a better leader.
3. Real estate is still one of the best paths to wealth — if you play the long game
My company helps people make honest, informed real estate decisions. I’ve watched many chase trends or try to time the market. But real estate rewards patience and perspective.
Some of my best investments didn’t look exciting on paper — but they had strong fundamentals. Over time, they became strategic assets, both financially and personally.
Avoid the hype. Focus on long-term value. Sometimes, doing nothing is the smartest move you can make.
4. You don’t need to be the loudest person in the room
In my early years, I believed visibility equaled success. I over-indexed on appearances — networking events, interviews, panels.
But the most impactful moves in my career came from quiet, focused work behind the scenes. Today, I choose depth over noise. I nurture a few meaningful relationships and let results speak for themselves.
Build your “trust circle.” Choose five people you admire and invest in those connections. You don’t need a big network. You need a strong one.
Related: Entrepreneurial Success Comes Down to Having the Right Mindset — Here’s How to Make Sure You Do
The biggest myth I believed was that success meant arriving. But success is constant movement. It’s reinvention. Pivoting without losing your center.
I’ve evolved from immigrant to employee, tech lead to CEO, and now founder to educator. I mentor entrepreneurs, speak at universities and write — not just to share what I’ve learned, but to keep growing myself. Each quarter, ask: What version of me am I outgrowing? Let the answer shape your next chapter.
Looking back, my path hasn’t been straight — and I wouldn’t change a thing. Fulfillment doesn’t come from proving yourself. It comes from building in alignment with who you’re becoming. Whether you’re just starting or starting over, know this: you don’t need to build the biggest company or be the loudest voice to make a lasting impact. You just need to build with intention.
And most importantly — keep going.
When I first moved to the United States, my goal was simple: survive. I had no connections, little understanding of the system, and a burning desire to build something meaningful. At 33, I shared my journey here — how I used grit, education and a bit of luck to launch a real estate tech startup built on transparency.
Four years later, I’m still standing — but I’ve changed. So has my definition of success.
Today, I’m the founder and CEO of a growing real estate tech company based in New York City. But how I run my business — and how I live — looks completely different from when I started. I’ve learned that building something sustainable takes more than hustle. It requires alignment, clarity, and the courage to evolve.
The rest of this article is locked.
Join Entrepreneur+ today for access.
Rodolfo Delgado
Source link -
This Trillion-Dollar Industry Is Where You Need to Look For Your Next Investment — Here’s Why | Entrepreneur
Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.
Here’s the uncomfortable truth: Most founders are still chasing yesterday’s markets. They’re building tools for productivity, or consumer apps that feel safe and familiar. Meanwhile, a new generation of companies is tackling the most universal customer need on earth — more years of energy, clarity and performance.
This isn’t wellness 2.0. This is the redefinition of healthcare, insurance, consumer products and even food. By 2030, the longevity economy will be worth an estimated $27 trillion globally. For business leaders, this represents a once-in-a-generation category: It touches everyone, enables recurring revenues and rewards those who build early.
The real question is simple: Will you profit from it — or watch from the sidelines?
Related: Why Personal Health and Wellness Are Key to Business Longevity
Why longevity is the next Gold Rush
For decades, healthcare has focused on treating disease. Wellness became a $5 trillion global industry filled with supplements, wearables and green juices. But now, the shift is toward healthspan — the years we spend in peak physical and mental condition.
The customer demand is obvious:
- Aging populations: By 2034, the U.S. will have more people over 65 than 18. Globally, one in six people will be over 60 by 2030. That’s not just demographics — that’s a new consumer majority.
- Rising costs: Chronic diseases and mental health conditions already account for 90% of U.S. healthcare spending. Businesses and insurers are desperate for solutions that prevent rather than patch.
- Spending power: The 50+ population already controls more than half of global consumer spending, yet most innovation still chases Gen Z. That’s a blind spot waiting to be exploited.
- Cultural momentum: From CEOs like Bryan Johnson spending millions on “biological age reversal” to mainstream adoption of WHOOP and Oura, longevity has gone from fringe to aspirational.
Here’s the point: Longevity is no longer about lab coats and science journals. It’s becoming a consumer status symbol, a corporate necessity and a national policy issue all at once. That convergence creates rocket fuel for entrepreneurs bold enough to enter.
Who’s leading the charge
Look at where the smartest money is already flowing:
- Altos Labs, backed by Jeff Bezos, is pursuing cellular reprogramming to reverse ageing itself.
- Thorne HealthTech is scaling biological age testing and personalized supplementation.
- Deep-tech startups are building senolytics (compounds that clear damaged cells), NAD+ boosters and precision nutrition platforms.
- Consumer brands are reframing skincare, fitness and even food around “cellular longevity.”
And it’s not just startups. Apple and Amazon are both quietly moving into health monitoring and prevention — because they know the next trillion-dollar market won’t be social feeds, it will be life itself.
These aren’t small plays. In 2024, longevity startups attracted $8.5 billion in funding — a 220% year-over-year increase. And yet, compared to fintech or AI, this category is still underfunded. That means the window is wide open.
Related: How Entrepreneurs Can Achieve Longevity
Where entrepreneurs can enter
You don’t need to be a biotech scientist to build here. In fact, some of the biggest near-term opportunities are business-model plays, not lab breakthroughs:
- Data + AI platforms: Democratize access to advanced diagnostics, biomarket testing or personalized health programs. Think of it as “Mint.com for your biology.”
- Longevity as a service: Subscription models for supplements, recovery protocols or wearables that create sticky, recurring revenue.
- Talent and corporate healthspan: Companies will pay for healthier, sharper employees. Expect corporate packages for executive resilience, employee energy optimisation and “longevity perks.”
- Consumer rebrands: Skincare, nutrition and fitness companies are already pivoting around the language of healthspan to differentiate. I’ve already invested in this space myself: Under my brand Rejna, I’m launching a skincare collection called Rejuvenate, built around the concept of “skinspan” — positioning skin health as a core pillar of longevity, not just cosmetics. It’s a live example of how consumer brands can reframe their value proposition to align with the longevity revolution.
- Longevity communities: Hybrid digital + physical hubs offering programs, recovery lounges and memberships designed for the new aspirational class: the longevity customer.
Translation for business leaders: You don’t need a lab. You need vision, distribution and the courage to build for where the market is going, not where it’s been.
How business leaders can act now
- Educate yourself and your team. Follow longevity leaders (David Sinclair, Peter Diamandis and Laura Deming to name a few). Subscribe to longevity reports. Send your team to a longevity summit.
- Identity synergies with your business. Whether you’re in food, beauty, insurance, HR or data, there’s a longevity angle. If you’re not thinking about it, your competitors will.
- Start small, scale fast. Launch a pilot offering: corporate wellness with a longevity spin, a subscription recovery service or a data product built on wearable integration. Test, learn and scale.
- Position for partnerships. Big pharma, insurers and consumer brands will need agile partners. If you’re early, you’ll be the acquisition target, not the disrupted.
- Signal the story. Investors and employees back vision. Frame your longevity play as part of a bigger comeback or market-defining narrative. The story matters as much as the science.
Related: Why Top Entrepreneurs Are Swapping Beach Vacations for Longevity Retreats
The bigger picture
Longevity isn’t about living forever. It’s about compressing the years of illness, fatigue and decline — and extending the years of vitality, clarity and purpose.
The smartest entrepreneurs understand this isn’t just science, it’s strategy. It’s the chance to build the companies that will define the next decade of human health — and make fortunes doing it.
The next trillion-dollar industry won’t just help us live longer. It will help us live better. The only question is: Are you building for it now, or waiting until it’s too late?
Here’s the uncomfortable truth: Most founders are still chasing yesterday’s markets. They’re building tools for productivity, or consumer apps that feel safe and familiar. Meanwhile, a new generation of companies is tackling the most universal customer need on earth — more years of energy, clarity and performance.
This isn’t wellness 2.0. This is the redefinition of healthcare, insurance, consumer products and even food. By 2030, the longevity economy will be worth an estimated $27 trillion globally. For business leaders, this represents a once-in-a-generation category: It touches everyone, enables recurring revenues and rewards those who build early.
The real question is simple: Will you profit from it — or watch from the sidelines?
The rest of this article is locked.
Join Entrepreneur+ today for access.
Rejna Alaaldin
Source link -
True Health Intiative: Scientific Consensus on a Healthy Diet | NutritionFacts.org
The leading risk factor for death in the United States is the American diet.
About a decade ago, the American Heart Association (AHA) expressed concern that its “2020 target of improving cardiovascular health by 20% by 2020 will not be reached if current trends continue.” By 2006, most people were already not smoking and had nearly achieved their goal for exercise. But when it came to healthy diet score, only about 1 percent got a 4 or 5 out of its diet quality score of 0 to 5, as you can see below and at 0:35 in my video, Friday Favorites: The Scientific Consensus on a Healthy Diet. And that’s with such “ideal” criteria as drinking less than four and a half cups of soda a week.
In the last decade, the AHA saw a bump in the prevalence of the ideal healthy diet score to about 1 percent of Americans reaching those kinds of basic criteria, but, given its “aggressive” goal of reaching a “20% target” by 2020, it hoped to turn that 1 percent into about 1.2 percent. (Really, as you can see here and at 1:01 in my video.)
So, how’d we do? According to the 2019 update, it seems we’ve slipped down to as low as one in a thousand, and American teens scored a big fat zero. No wonder, perhaps, that “for all mortality-based metrics, the US rank declined…to 27th or 28th among 34 OECD [industrialized] countries. Citizens living in countries with a substantially lower gross domestic product and health expenditure per capita…have lower mortality rates than those in the United States.” Slovenia, for example, beat the United States, ranking 24th in life expectancy. More recently, the United States’s life expectancy slipped further, down to 43rd in the world, although the United States spent the most ($3.0 trillion) on health care…”
What is the leading risk factor for death in the United States? As seen below and at 2:04 in my video, it is the standard American diet. Those trillions in health care spending aren’t addressing the root cause of disease, disability, and death.
Here are some of the lung cancer death curves, below and at 2:08 in my video:
It took decades to finally turn the corner, but it’s so nice to finally see those drops. When will we see the same with diet?
“Approximately 80% of chronic disease and premature death could be prevented by not smoking, being physically active, and adhering to a healthful dietary pattern.” What exactly is meant by “healthy diet”? “Unfortunately, media messages surrounding nutrition are often inconsistent, confusing, and do not enable the public to make positive changes in health behaviors….Certainly, there is pressure within today’s competitive journalism market for sensationalism. There may even be a disincentive to present the facts in the context of the total body of information consumers need to act on dietary recommendations.” And there’s an incentive to sell more magazines and newspapers. The paper I’m quoting was written in 1997, before the lure of clickbait headlines. In fact, about three-quarters of a century ago, it was noted: “It is unfortunate that the subject of nutrition seems to have a special appeal to the credulous, the social zealot and, in the commercial field, the unscrupulous….The combination is one calculated to strike despair in the hearts of the sober, objective scientist.”
Indeed, the most important health care problem we face may be “our poor lifestyle choices based on misinformation.” It is like the climate change deniers: “Analogous to outspoken cynics denying climate change and influencing public opinion, healthy lifestyle and dietary advice are overshadowed by critics, diet books, the food industry, and misguided information in the media.” Maybe we need an entity like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)—but for nutrition.
These days, “no single expert, regardless of academic stature or reputation, has the prominence to overcome the obstacles created by confusing media messages and deliver the fundamental principles of healthy living effectively to the public.”
What if there were “a global coalition consisting of a variety of nutrition experts, who collectively represent the views held by the majority of scientists, physicians, and health practitioners” that could “serve as the guiding resource of sound nutrition information for improved health and prevention of disease”?
Enter the True Health Initiative, which “was conceived for that very purpose.” A nonprofit coalition of hundreds of experts from dozens of countries has agreed to a consensus statement on the fundamentals of healthy living. See www.truehealthinitiative.org.
Spoiler alert: The healthiest diet is one generally comprised mostly of minimally processed plants.
Michael Greger M.D. FACLM
Source link -
Eating to Downregulate a Gene for Metastatic Cancer | NutritionFacts.org
Women with breast cancer should include the “liberal culinary use of cruciferous vegetables.”
Both the Women’s Intervention Nutrition Study and the Women’s Health Initiative study showed that women randomized to a lower-fat diet enjoyed improved breast cancer survival. However, in the Women’s Healthy Eating and Living Study, women with breast cancer were also randomized to drop their fat intake down to 15 to 20 percent of calories, yet there was no difference in breast cancer relapse or death after seven years.
Any time there’s an unexpected result, you must question whether the participants actually followed through with study instructions. For instance, if you randomized people to stop smoking and they ended up with the same lung cancer rates as those in the group who weren’t instructed to quit, one likely explanation is that the group told to stop smoking didn’t actually stop. In the Women’s Healthy Eating and Living Study, both the dietary intervention group and the control group started out at about 30 percent of calories from fat. Then, the diet group was told to lower their fat intake to 15 to 20 percent of calories. By the end of the study, they had in fact gone from 28.5 percent fat to 28.9 percent fat, as you can see below and at 1:16 in my video The Food That Can Downregulate a Metastatic Cancer Gene. They didn’t even reduce their fat intake. No wonder they didn’t experience any breast cancer benefit.
When you put together all the trials on the effect of lower-fat diets on breast cancer survival, even including that flawed study, you see a reduced risk of breast cancer relapse and a reduced risk of death. In conclusion, going on a low-fat diet after a breast cancer diagnosis “can improve breast cancer survival by reducing the risk of recurrence.” We may now know why: by targeting metastasis-initiating cancer cells through the fat receptor CD36.
We know that the cancer-spreading receptor is upregulated by saturated fat. Is there anything in our diet that can downregulate it? Broccoli.
Broccoli appears to decrease CD36 expression by as much as 35 percent (in mice). Of all fruits and vegetables, cruciferous vegetables like broccoli were the only ones associated with significantly less total risk of cancer and not just getting cancer in the first place, as you can see here and at 2:19 in my video.
Those with bladder cancer who eat broccoli also appear to live longer than those who don’t, and those with lung cancer who eat more cruciferous veggies appear to survive longer, too.
For example, as you can see below and at 2:45 in my video, one year out, about 75 percent of lung cancer patients eating more than one serving of cruciferous vegetables a day were still alive (the top line in red), whereas, by then, most who had been getting less than half a serving a day had already died from their cancer (the bottom line in green).
Ovarian cancer, too. Intake of cruciferous vegetables “significantly favored survival,” whereas “a survival disadvantage was shown for meats.” Milk also appeared to double the risk of dying. Below and at 3:21 in my video are the survival graphs. Eight years out, about 40 percent of ovarian cancer patients who averaged meat or milk every day were deceased (the boldest line, on the bottom), compared to only about 20 percent who had meat or milk only a few times a week at most (the faintest line, on the top).
Now, it could be that the fat and cholesterol in meat increased circulating estrogen levels, or it could be because of meat’s growth hormones or all its carcinogens. And galactose, the sugar naturally found in milk, may be directly toxic to the ovary. Dairy has all its hormones, too. However, the lowering of risk with broccoli and the increasing of risk with meat and dairy are also consistent with the CD36 mechanism of cancer spread.
Researchers put it to the test in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer who were given pulverized broccoli sprouts or a placebo. The average death rate was lower in the broccoli sprout group compared to the placebo group. After a month, 18 percent of the placebo group had died, but none in the broccoli group. By three months, another 25 percent of the placebo group had died, but still not a single death in the broccoli group. And by six months, 43 percent of the remaining patients in the placebo group were deceased, along with the first 25 percent of the broccoli group. Unfortunately, even though the capsules for both groups looked the same, “true blinding was not possible,” and the patients knew which group they were in “because the pulverized broccoli sprouts could be easily distinguished from the methylcellulose [placebo] through their characteristic smell and taste.” So, we can’t discount the placebo effect. What’s more, the study participants weren’t properly randomized “because many of the patients refused to participate unless they were placed into the [active] treatment group.” That’s understandable, but it makes for a less rigorous result. A little broccoli can’t hurt, though, and it may help. It’s the lack of downsides of broccoli consumption that leads to “Advising Women Undergoing Treatment for Breast Cancer” to include the “liberal culinary use of cruciferous vegetables,” for example.
It’s the same for reducing saturated fat. The title of an editorial in a journal of the National Cancer Institute asked: “Is It Time to Give Breast Cancer Patients a Prescription for a Low-Fat Diet?” “Although counseling women to consume a healthy diet after breast cancer diagnosis is certainly warranted for general health, the existing data still fall a bit short of proving this will help reduce the risk of breast cancer recurrence and mortality.” But what do we have to lose? After all, it’s still certainly warranted for general health.
Michael Greger M.D. FACLM
Source link -
Eating to Help Control Cancer Metastasis | NutritionFacts.org
Randomized controlled trials show that lowering saturated fat intake can lead to improved breast cancer survival.
The leading cause of cancer-related death is metastasis. Cancer kills because cancer spreads. The five-year survival rate for women with localized breast cancer is nearly 99 percent, for example, but that falls to only 27 percent in women with metastasized cancer. Yet, “our ability to effectively treat metastatic disease has not changed significantly in the past few decades…” The desperation is evident when there are such papers as “Targeting Metastasis with Snake Toxins: Molecular Mechanisms.”
We have built-in defenses, natural killer cells that roam the body, killing off budding tumors. But, as I’ve discussed, there’s a fat receptor called CD36 that appears to be essential for cancer cells to spread, and these cancer cells respond to dietary fat intake, but not all fat.
CD36 is upregulated by palmitic acid, as much as a 50-fold increase within 12 hours of consumption, as shown below and at 1:13 in my video How to Help Control Cancer Metastasis with Diet.
Palmitic acid is a saturated fat made from palm oil that can be found in junk food, but it is most concentrated in meat and dairy. This may explain why, when looking at breast cancer mortality and dietary fat, “there was no difference in risk of breast-cancer-specific death…for women in the highest versus the lowest category of total fat intake,” but there’s about a 50 percent greater likelihood of dying of breast cancer with higher intake of saturated fat. Researchers conclude: “These meta-analyses have shown that saturated fat intake negatively impacts breast cancer survival.”
This may also explain why “intake of high-fat dairy, but not low-fat dairy, was related to a higher risk of mortality after breast cancer diagnosis.” If a protein in dairy, like casein, was the problem, skim milk might be even worse, but that wasn’t the case. It’s the saturated butterfat, perhaps because it triggered that cancer-spreading mechanism induced by CD36. Women who consumed one or more daily servings of high-fat dairy had about a 50 percent higher risk of dying from breast cancer.
We see the same with dairy and its relationship to prostate cancer survival. Researchers found that “drinking high-fat milk increased the risk of dying from prostate cancer by as much as 600% in patients with localized prostate cancer. Low-fat milk was not associated with such an increase in risk.” So, it seems to be the animal fat, rather than the animal protein, and these findings are consistent with analyses from the Health Professionals Follow-up Study (HPFS) and the Physicians’ Health Study (PHS), conducted by Harvard researchers.
There is even more evidence that the fat receptor CD36 is involved. The “risk of colorectal cancer for meat consumption” increased from a doubling to an octupling—that is, the odds of getting cancer multiplied eightfold for those who carry a specific type of CD36 gene. So, “Is It Time to Give Breast Cancer Patients a Prescription for a Low-Fat Diet?” A cancer diagnosis is often referred to as a ‘teachable moment’ when patients are motivated to make changes to their lifestyle, and so provision of evidence-based guidelines is essential.”
In a randomized, prospective, multicenter clinical trial, researchers set out “to test the effect of a dietary intervention designed to reduce fat intake in women with resected, early-stage breast cancer,” meaning the women had had their breast cancer surgically removed. As shown below and at 4:02 in my video, the study participants in the dietary intervention group dropped their fat intake from about 30 percent of calories down to 20 percent, reduced their saturated fat intake by about 40 percent, and maintained it for five years. “After approximately 5 years of follow-up, women in the dietary intervention group had a 24% lower risk of relapse”—a 24-percent lower risk of the cancer coming back—“than those in the control group.”
That was the WINS study, the Women’s Intervention Nutrition Study. Then there was the Women’s Health Initiative study, where, again, women were randomized to lower their fat intake down to 20 percent of calories, and, again, “those randomized to a low-fat dietary pattern had increased breast cancer overall survival. Meaning: A dietary change may be able to influence breast cancer outcome.” What’s more, not only was their breast cancer survival significantly greater, but the women also experienced a reduction in heart disease and a reduction in diabetes.
Michael Greger M.D. FACLM
Source link -
Dietary Components That May Cause Cancer to Metastasize | NutritionFacts.org
Palmitic acid, a saturated fat concentrated in meat and dairy, can boost the metastatic potential of cancer cells through the fat receptor CD36.
The leading cause of death in cancer patients is metastasis formation. That’s how most people die of cancer—not from the primary tumor, but the cancer spreading through the body. “It is estimated that metastasis is responsible for ~90% of cancer deaths,” and little progress has been made in stopping the spread, despite our modern medical armamentarium. In fact, we can sometimes make matters worse. In an editorial entitled “Therapy-Induced Metastasis,” its authors “provide evidence that all the common therapies, including radiotherapy, chemotherapy, fine needle biopsies, surgical procedures and anaesthesia, have the potential to contribute to tumour progression.” You can imagine how cutting around a tumor and severing blood vessels might lead to the “migration of residual tumour cells,” but why chemotherapy? How might chemo exacerbate metastases? “Despite reducing the size of primary tumors, chemotherapy changes the tumor microenvironment”—its surrounding tissues—“resulting in an increased escape of cancer cells into the blood stream.” Sometimes, chemo, surgery, and radiation are entirely justified, but, again, other times, these treatments can make matters worse. If only we had a way to treat the cause of the cancer’s spreading.
The development of antimetastatic therapies has been hampered by the fact that the cells that initiate metastasis remain unidentified. Then, a landmark study was published: “Targeting Metastasis-Initiating Cells Through the Fatty Acid Receptor CD36.” Researchers found a subpopulation of human cancer cells “unique in their ability to initiate metastasis”; they all express high levels of a fat receptor known as CD36, dubbed “the fat controller.” It turns out that palmitic acid or a high-fat diet specifically boosts the metastatic potential of these cancer cells. Where is palmitic acid found? Although it was originally discovered in palm oil, palmitic acid is most concentrated in meat and dairy. “Emerging evidence shows that palmitic acid (PA), a common fatty acid in the human diet, serves as a signaling molecule regulating the progression and development of many diseases at the molecular level.” It is the saturated fat that is recognized by CD36 receptors on cancer cells, and we know it is to blame, because if the CD36 receptor is blocked, so are metastases.
The study was of a human cancer, but it was a human cancer implanted into mice. However, clinically (meaning in cancer patients themselves), the presence of these CD36-studded metastasis-initiating cells does indeed correlate with a poor prognosis. CD36 appears to drive the progression of brain tumors, for example. As seen in the survival curves shown below and at 3:21 in my video What Causes Cancer to Metastasize?, those with tumors with less CD36 expression lived significantly longer. It is the same with breast cancer mortality: “In this study, we correlated the mortality of breast cancer patients to tumor CD36 expression levels.” That isn’t a surprise, since “CD36 plays a critical role in proliferation, migration and…growth of…breast cancer cells.” If we inhibit CD36, we can inhibit “the migration and invasion of the breast cancer cells.”
Below and at 3:46 in my video, you can see breast cancer cell migration and invasion, before and after CD36 inhibition. (The top lines with circles are before CD36 inhibition, and the bottom lines with squares are after.)
This isn’t only in “human melanoma- and breast cancer–derived tumours” either. Now we suspect that “CD36 expression drives ovarian cancer progression and metastasis,” too, since we can inhibit ovarian cancer cell invasion and migration, as well as block both lymph node and blood-borne metastasis, by blocking CD36. We also see the same kind of effect with prostate cancer; suppress the uptake of fat by prostate cancer cells and suppress the tumor. This was all studied with receptor-blocking drugs and antibodies in a laboratory setting, though. If these “metastasis-initiating cancer cells particularly rely on dietary lipids [fat] to promote metastasis,” the spread of cancer, why not just block the dietary fat in the first place?
“Lipid metabolism fuels cancer’s spread.” Cancer cells love fat and cholesterol. The reason is that so much energy is stored in fat. “Hence, CD36+ metastatic cells might take advantage of this feature to obtain the high amount of energy that is likely to be required for them to anchor and survive at sites distant from the primary tumour”—to set up shop throughout the body.
“The time when glucose [sugar] was considered as the major, if not only, fuel to support cancer cell proliferation is over.” There appears to be “a fatter way to metastasize.” No wonder high-fat diets (HFD) may “play a crucial role in increasing the risk of different cancer types, and a number of clinical studies have linked HFD with several advanced cancers.”
If dietary fat may be “greasing the wheels of the cancer machine,” might there be “specific dietary regimens” we could use to starve cancers of dietary fat? You don’t know until you put it to the test, which we’ll look at next.
Michael Greger M.D. FACLM
Source link -
Eating with Hypothyroidism and Hyperthyroidism | NutritionFacts.org
Is the apparent protection of plant-based diets for thyroid health due to the exclusion of animal foods, the benefits of plant foods, or both?
Several autoimmune diseases affect the thyroid gland, and Graves’ disease and Hashimoto’s thyroiditis are the most common. Graves’ disease results in hyperthyroidism, an overactive thyroid gland. Though slaughter plants are supposed to remove animals’ thyroid glands as they “shall not be used for human food,” should some neck meat slip in, you can suffer a similar syndrome called Hamburger thyrotoxicosis. That isn’t from your body making too much thyroid hormone, though. Rather, it’s from your body eating too much thyroid hormone. Graves’ disease is much more common, and meat-free diets may be able to help with both diseases, as plant-based diets may be associated with a low prevalence of autoimmune disease in general, as observed, for example, in rural sub-Saharan Africa. Maybe it’s because plants are packed with “high amounts of antioxidants, possible protective factors against autoimmune disease,” or because they’re packed with anti-inflammatory compounds. After all, “consuming whole, plant-based foods is synonymous with an anti-inflammatory diet.” But you don’t know until you put it to the test.
It turns out that the “exclusion of all animal foods was associated with half the prevalence of hyperthyroidism compared with omnivorous diets. Lacto-ovo [dairy-and-egg] and pesco [fish] vegetarian diets were associated with intermediate protection.” But, for those eating strictly plant-based, there is a 52 percent lower odds of hyperthyroidism.
As I discuss in my video The Best Diet for Hypothyroidism and Hyperthyroidism, this apparent protection “may be due to the exclusion of animal foods, the [beneficial] effects of plant foods, or both. Animal foods like meat, eggs, and dairy products may contain high oestrogen concentrations, which have been linked to autoimmunity in cell and animal studies.” Or it could be because the decrease in animal protein by excluding animal foods may downregulate IGF-1, which is not just a cancer-promoting growth hormone, but may play a role in autoimmune diseases. The protection could also come from the goodness in plants that may “protect cells against autoimmune processes,” like the polyphenol phytochemicals, such as flavonoids found in plant foods. Maybe it’s because environmental toxins build up in the food chain. For example, fish contaminated with industrial pollutants, like PCBs, are associated with an increased frequency of thyroid disorders.
But what about the other autoimmune thyroid disease, Hashimoto’s thyroiditis, which, assuming you’re getting enough iodine, is the primary cause of hypothyroidism, an underactive thyroid gland? Graves’ disease wasn’t the only autoimmune disorder that was rare or virtually unknown among those living in rural sub-Saharan Africa, eating near-vegan diets. They also appeared to have less Hashimoto’s.
There is evidence that those with Hashimoto’s have compromised antioxidant status, but we don’t know if it’s cause or effect. But if you look at the dietary factors associated with blood levels of autoimmune anti-thyroid antibodies, animal fats seem to be associated with higher levels, whereas vegetables and other plant foods are associated with lower levels. So, again, anti-inflammatory diets may be useful. It’s no surprise, as Hashimoto’s is an inflammatory disease—that’s what thyroiditis means: inflammation of the thyroid gland.
Another possibility is the reduction in intake of methionine, an amino acid concentrated in animal protein, thought to be one reason why “regular consumption of whole-food vegan diets is likely to have a favourable influence on longevity through decreasing the risk of cancer, coronary [heart] disease, and diabetes.” Methionine restriction improves thyroid function in mice, but it has yet to be put to the test for Hashimoto’s in humans.
If you compare the poop of patients with Hashimoto’s to controls, the condition appears to be related to a clear reduction in the concentration of Prevotella species. Prevotella are good fiber-eating bugs known to enhance anti-inflammatory activities. Decreased Prevotella levels are also something you see in other autoimmune conditions, such as multiple sclerosis and type 1 diabetes. How do you get more Prevotella? Eat more plants. If a vegetarian goes on a diet of meat, eggs, and dairy, within as few as four days, their levels can drop. So, one would expect those eating plant-based diets to have less Hashimoto’s, but in a previous video, I expressed concern about insufficient iodine intake, which could also lead to hypothyroidism. So, which is it? Let’s find out.
“In conclusion, a vegan diet tended to be associated with lower, not higher, risk of hypothyroid disease.” Why “tended”? The associated protection against hypothyroidism incidence and prevalence studies did not reach statistical significance. It wasn’t just because they were slimmer either. The lower risk existed even after controlling for body weight. So, researchers think it might be because animal products may induce inflammation. The question I have is: If someone who already has Hashimoto’s, what happens if they change their diet? That’s exactly what I’ll explore next.
This is the third in a four-video series on thyroid function. The first two were Are Vegans at Risk for Iodine Deficiency? and Friday Favorites: The Healthiest Natural Source of Iodine.
Stay tuned for the final video: Diet for Hypothyroidism: A Natural Treatment for Hashimoto’s Disease.
Michael Greger M.D. FACLM
Source link -
Statins and Muscle Pain Side Effects | NutritionFacts.org
Why is the incidence of side effects from statins so low in clinical trials while appearing to be so high in the real world?
“There is now overwhelming evidence to support reducing LDL-C (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol)”—so-called bad cholesterol—to reduce atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD),” the number one killer of men and women. So, why is adherence to cholesterol-lowering statin drug therapy such “a major challenge worldwide”? Researchers found “that the majority of studies reported that at least 40%, and as much as 80%, of patients did not comply fully with statin treatment recommendations.” Three-quarters of patients may flat out stop taking them, and almost 90 percent may discontinue treatment altogether.
When asked why they stopped taking the pills, most “former statin users or discontinuers…cited muscle pain, a side effect, as the primary reason…” “SAMSs”—statin-associated muscle symptoms—“are by far the most prevalent and important adverse event, with up to 72% of all statin adverse events being muscle-related.” Taking coenzyme Q10 supplements as a treatment for statin-associated muscle symptoms was a good idea in theory, but they don’t appear to help. Normally, side-effect symptoms go away when you stop the drug but can sometimes linger for a year or more. There is “growing evidence that statin intolerance is predominantly psychosocial, not pharmacological.” Really? It may be mostly just in people’s heads?
“Statins have developed a bad reputation with the public, a phenomenon driven largely by proliferation on the Internet of bizarre and unscientific but seemingly persuasive criticism of these drugs.” “Does Googling lead to statin intolerance?” But people have stopped taking statins for decades before there even was an Internet. What kinds of data have doctors suggested that patients are falsely “misattribut[ing] normal aches and pains to be statin side effects”?
Well, if you take people who claim to have statin-related muscle pain and randomize them back and forth between statins and an identical-looking placebo in three-week blocks, they can’t tell whether they’re getting the real drug or the sugar pill. The problem with that study, though, is that it may take months not only to develop statin-induced muscle pain, but months before it goes away, so no wonder three weeks on and three weeks off may not be long enough for the participants to discern which is which.
However, these data are more convincing: Ten thousand people were randomized to a statin or a sugar pill for a few years, but so many more people were dying in the sugar pill group that the study had to be stopped prematurely. So then everyone was offered the statin, and the researchers noted that there was “no excess of reports of muscle-related AEs” (adverse effects) among patients assigned to the statin over those assigned to the placebo. But when the placebo phase was over and the people knew they were on a statin, they went on to report more muscle side effects than those who knew they weren’t taking the statin. “These analyses illustrate the so-called nocebo effect,” which is akin to the opposite of the placebo effect.
Placebo effects are positive consequences falsely attributed to a treatment, whereas nocebo effects are negative consequences falsely attributed to a treatment, as was evidently seen here. There was an excess rate of muscle-related adverse effects reported only when patients and their doctors were aware that statin therapy was being used, and not when its use was concealed. The researchers hope “these results will help assure both physicians and patients that most AEs associated with statins are not causally related to use of the drug and should help counter…exaggerated claims about statin-related side effects.”
These are the kinds of results from “placebo-controlled randomised trials [that] have shown definitively that almost all of the symptomatic adverse events that are attributed to statin therapy in routine practice are not actually caused by it (ie, they represent misattribution.)” Now, “only a few patients will believe that their SAMS are of psychogenic origin” and just in their head, but their denial may have “deadly consequences.” Indeed, “discontinuing statin treatment may be a life-threatening mistake.”
Below and at 4:46 in my video How Common Are Muscle Side Effects from Statins?, you can see the mortality of those who stopped their statins after having a possible adverse reaction compared to those who stuck with them. This translates into about “1 excess death for every 83 patients who discontinued treatment” within a four-year period. So, when there are media reports about statin side effects and people stop taking them, this could “result in thousands of fatal and disabling heart attacks and strokes, which would otherwise have been avoided. Seldom in the history of modern therapeutics have the substantial proven benefits of a treatment been compromised to such an extent by serious misrepresentations of the evidence for its safety.” But is it a misrepresentation to suggest “that statin therapy causes side-effects in up to one fifth of patients”? That is what is seen in clinical practice; between 10 to 25 percent of patients placed on statins complain of muscle problems. However, because we don’t see anywhere near those kinds of numbers in controlled trials, patients are accused of being confused. Why is the incidence of side effects from statins so low in clinical trials while appearing to be so high in the real world?
Take this meta-analysis of clinical trials, for example: It found muscle problems not in 1 in 5 patients, but only 1 in 2,000. Should everyone over a certain age be on statins? Not surprisingly, every one of those trials was funded by statin manufacturers themselves. So, for example, “how could the statin RCTs [randomized controlled trials] miss detecting mild statin-related muscle adverse side effects such as myalgia [muscle pain]? By not asking. A review of 44 statin RCTs reveals that only 1 directly asked about muscle-related adverse effects.” So, are the vast majority of side effects just being missed in all these trials, or are the vast majority of side effects seen in clinical practice just a figment of patients’ imagination? The bottom line is we don’t know, but there is certainly an urgent need to figure it out.
Michael Greger M.D. FACLM
Source link -
Eating to Keep Ulcerative Colitis in Remission | NutritionFacts.org
Plant-based diets can be 98 percent effective in keeping ulcerative colitis patients in remission, far exceeding the efficacy of other treatments.
“One of the most common questions physicians treating patients with IBD [inflammatory bowel disease] are asked is whether changing diet could positively affect the course of their disease.” Traditionally, we had to respond that we didn’t know. That may now be changing, given the “evidence in the literature that hydrogen sulfide may play a role in UC,” ulcerative colitis. And, since the sulfur-containing amino acids concentrated in meat cause an increase in colonic levels of this rotten egg gas, perhaps we should “take off the meat.” Indeed, animal protein isn’t associated only with an increased risk of getting inflammatory bowel disease in the first place, but also IBD relapses once you have the disease.
This is a recent development. “Because the concept of IBD as a lifestyle disease mediated mainly by a westernized diet is not widely appreciated, an analysis of diet in the follow-up period [after diagnosis] in relation to a relapse of IBD has been ignored”—but no longer. Ulcerative colitis patients in remission and their diets were followed for a year to see which foods were linked to the return of their bloody diarrhea. Researchers found that the “strongest relationship between a dietary factor and an increased risk of relapse observed in this study was for a high intake of meat,” as I discuss in my video The Best Diet for Ulcerative Colitis Treatment.
What if people lower their intake of sulfur-containing amino acids by decreasing their consumption of animal products? Researchers tried this on four ulcerative colitis patients, and without any change in their medications, the patients experienced about a fourfold improvement in their loose stools. In fact, they felt so much better that the researchers didn’t think it was ethical to try switching the patients back to their typical diets. “Sulfur-containing amino acids are the primary source of dietary sulfur,” so a “low-sulfur” diet essentially means “a shift from a more traditional western diet (high in animal protein and fat, and low in fiber) to more of a plant-based diet (high in fiber, lower in animal protein and fat).” “Altogether, westernized diets are pro-inflammatory, and PBD [plant-based diets] are anti-inflammatory.”
What can treatment with a plant-based diet do after the onset of ulcerative colitis during a low-carbohydrate weight-loss diet? A 36-year-old man lost 13 pounds on a low-carb diet, but he also lost his health; he was diagnosed with ulcerative colitis. When he was put on a diet centered around whole plant foods, his symptoms resolved without medication. He achieved remission. That was just one case, though. Case reports are akin to glorified anecdotes. The value of case reports lies in their ability to inspire researchers to put them to the test, and that’s exactly what they did.
Until then, there had never been a study published that focused on using plant-based diets for treating ulcerative colitis. Wrote the researchers, a group of Japanese gastroenterologists, “We consider that the lack of a suitable diet is the biggest issue faced in the current treatment of IBD. We regard IBD as a lifestyle disease caused mainly by our omnivorous (Western) diet. We have been providing a plant-based diet (PBD) to all patients with IBD” for more than a decade and have published extraordinary results, far better than have been reported elsewhere in the medical literature to date. (I profiled some of their early work in one of the first videos that went up on NutritionFacts.org.) The researchers found a plant-based diet to be “effective in the maintenance of remission” in Crohn’s disease by 100 percent at one year and 90 percent at two years. What about a plant-based diet for relapse prevention in ulcerative colitis?
“Educational hospitalization” involved bringing patients into the hospital to control their diet and educate them about the benefits of plant-based eating (so they’d be more motivated to continue it at home). “Most patients (77%) experienced some improvement, such as disappearance or decrease of bloody stool during hospitalization.” Fantastic!
Here’s the really exciting part. The researchers then followed the patients for five years, and 81 percent of them remained in remission for the entire five years, and 98 percent kept the disease at bay for at least one year. That blows away other treatments. Those relapse rates are far lower than those reported with medication. Under conventional treatment, other studies found that about half of the individuals relapse, compared to only 2 percent of those taught to eat healthier.
“A PBD was previously shown to be effective in both the active and quiescent stages of Crohn’s disease. The current study showed that a PBD is effective in both the active and quiescent stages of UC as well.” So, the researchers did another study on even more severely affected cases with active disease and found the same results, with plant-based eating beating conventional drug therapy by far. People felt so much better that they were still eating more plant-based food even six years later. The researchers conclude that a plant-based diet is effective for treating ulcerative colitis to prevent a relapse.
Why? Well, plant-based diets are rich in fiber, which feeds our good gut bugs. “This observation might partly explain why a PBD prevents a variety of chronic diseases. Indeed, the same explanation applies to IBD, indicating that replacing an omnivorous diet with a PBD in IBD is the right approach.”
It’s like using plant-based diets to treat the cause of heart disease, our number one killer. Plant-based eating isn’t only safer and cheaper, but it also works better with no noted adverse side effects. Let’s compare that to the laundry list of side effects of immunosuppressants used for ulcerative colitis, like cyclosporine, which you can see below and at 5:40 in my video.We now have even fancier drugs costing about $60,000 a year, about $5,000 a month, and they don’t even work very well; clinical remission at one year is only about 17 to 34 percent. And, instead of no adverse side effects, the drugs can give us a stroke, give us heart failure, and can even give us cancer, including a rare type of cancer that often results in death. Also, a serious brain disease known as progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy, which can kill us, and for which there is no known treatment or cure. One drug lists an “increased risk of death” but touts that it’s just “a small pill” in an “easy-to-open bottle.” I’d skip the pills (and their potential side effects) and stick with plant-based eating.
Doctor’s Note:
If you missed the previous video, see Preventing Inflammatory Bowel Disease with Diet and stay tuned for The Best Diet for Crohn’s Disease Treatment, coming up next.
Check the related posts below for some older videos on IBD that may be of interest to you.Michael Greger M.D. FACLM
Source link -
The Link Between Sleep & Muscle Health, From A Nurse Practitioner
That doesn’t mean exercise and nutrition aren’t important when it comes to building and maintaining muscle. “When I’m working with someone who’s really trying to build lean muscle, I always remind them that you have to hit protein macros, you have to lift heavy things, and you have to have high-quality sleep,” she explains. “You can’t build healthy, lean muscle without all three of those.”
-
This Single Device Reduces Inflammation, Stops Wrinkles & Boosts Recovery
And it takes only 20 minutes per day.
-
Can Bone Density Impact Dementia Risk? A Study Says Yes
When it comes to health in the United States, you may say that bone density isn’t one of our strengths. In 2010, approximately 10 million Americans aged 50 and over had osteoporosis, according to the Journal of Bone and Mineral Research. Over 43 million more had low bone mass.
-
Tai chi helps with strength, flexibility, and longevity—no matter what your age
Tai chi has a long and storied history of helping people calm their minds, increase their balance and flexibility, and connect with their communities. While some may dismiss this practice as nothing more than a post-retirement pastime, that could not be further from the reality—which is that people of all ages can experience the benefits. Plus, getting started is beyond easy.
What is tai chi?
Tai chi is an ancient Chinese martial art. While historians don’t know exactly when the practice began, it may have been as early as the 8th century.
“Tai chi started as a martial art in a time when danger came from violent attacks from marauders and enemies,” says Andrea Lepcio, certified Tai Chi For Health Institute instructor and founder and owner at fitness training company Mighty Fit. “Today, danger comes more often from within our bodies. Tai chi has become a mind-body practice that strengthens the body, improves balance, and brings harmony.”
If you were to watch a tai chi class in action, you’d see a series of gentle, slow exercises conducted in close succession. These wave-like movements pair with breathing patterns that calm the body. That said, there are many different styles of varying levels of popularity, including Yang style, the most popular style, which involves large fluid movements, and Chen style, which is considered the oldest form of tai chi.
The health benefits of practicing tai chi at any age
Tai chi has benefits regardless of the practitioner’s age. “While it’s true that tai chi is often recommended for older individuals because of its gentle, low-impact nature, younger people can also benefit greatly. For younger practitioners, tai chi builds strength, flexibility, and coordination,” says Jenelle Kim, doctor of Chinese Medicine. “It’s an excellent way to manage stress, improve focus, and increase body awareness, which is useful in everything from sports performance to daily life.”
While studies on the effects of tai chi are relatively small, the findings so far are promising. Lepcio references a 2007 study conducted on 702 participants that found that weekly tai chi community practices may reduce falls among “relatively healthy, community-dwelling older people.” This is significant, given that falls are the second leading cause of unintentional injury death worldwide, according to the World Health Organization (WHO).
And new research published in the journal Front Public Health in 2023 found that the martial art may improve both static and dynamic balance in older people. Static balance refers to one’s ability to hold a pose (like standing on one foot) without falling, while dynamic balance is about remaining in control while you’re performing different movements (like shifting your weight forward and backward).
Since you’re not lifting weights (or even body weight) when you practice tai chi, you shouldn’t expect massive muscle gain from the practice. Instead, you can enjoy a low-impact workout that may still improve your overall fitness, according to a 2021 meta-analysis, through controlled motions. “Tai chi’s slow, deliberate movements help enhance balance by strengthening the muscles and improving coordination,” says Kim. Many teachers believe that the practice may also improve circulation, though we don’t yet have the research to prove that.
Of course, if you’ve heard anyone talk about tai chi, you’ve probably heard raves about its mental health benefits. A 2023 meta-analysis found that the martial art reduced participants’ symptoms of depression and anxiety, improving their overall quality of life. “Tai chi incorporates deep breathing and mindful focus, which helps calm the nervous system and reduce stress,” says Kim. She adds that practicing this regularly may promote mental clarity and ease stress, especially for those who feel too antsy to try seated meditation.
How to get started with tai chi
Lepcio suggests trying a class led by a trained instructor simply by searching online for the closest beginner tai chi class—or even checking one out on YouTube to see what you think. And remember: This martial art really is for everyone, so grab a friend and try it out. “Younger people are often under stress,” Lepcio adds. “Tai chi is an excellent practice for focusing on the breath in this moving meditation.”
In case you want to give tai chi a try right now, though, we asked Kim for a few beginner movements to do at home. So put on some comfortable clothes, clear away some space, and get moving.
Starting Posture
Stand with your feet shoulder-width apart and your knees slightly bent. Place your arms by your side. Stand upright and bring attention to your breathing. Inhale deeply through the nose and then exhale through the mouth.
Parting the Horse’s Mane
“From the starting posture, step one foot forward and move both hands in a circular motion as if you are holding an invisible ball,” says Kim. “One hand moves up in front of your body, while the other moves down by your side.”
Cloud Hands
“In a gentle, continuous motion, shift your weight from one leg to the other while moving your arms in a wave-like pattern across your body,” says Kim.
Again, the best way to experience tai chi is in the company of other people of all ages. So put on some comfy clothes and experience the mind/body benefits of this time-tested practice.
More on fitness and workouts:
Subscribe to Well Adjusted, our newsletter full of simple strategies to work smarter and live better, from the Fortune Well team. Sign up for free today.
Beth Greenfield
Source link -
Tackling Common Canine Diseases for a Longer, Healthier Life | Animal Wellness Magazine
Every dog parent dreams of seeing their furry friend thrive for years to come. However, common canine diseases can significantly impact a dog’s quality of life and longevity. Understanding these health challenges is the first step toward prevention and effective management. From heartworm to obesity, being informed can save a life. Here are some common diseases to avoid in dogs.
Heartworm Disease
Heartworm disease is often overlooked but poses a serious threat to dogs. Transmitted by mosquitoes, this disease can lead to severe heart and lung damage. With early detection and proper treatment, an affected dog can be cured, which tells us regular veterinary check-ups are crucial. Preventive medications are available, making it easier for dog parents to shield their companions from this silent killer.
Obesity
Obesity is a common issue among dogs, leading to numerous health complications like diabetes and joint problems. Dogs can become lethargic and lose their playful spirit due to excess weight. Their transformation can begin with a balanced diet and regular exercise. This shows that small changes, like incorporating playtime or long walks, can dramatically improve health. Remember, a healthy dog is a happy dog!
The Importance of Core Vaccines
Core vaccines are a fundamental tool in combating infectious diseases. Diseases like parvovirus, distemper, and rabies can be fatal but are preventable through timely vaccinations. Staying updated on vaccinations or disease-related titers not only protects individual dogs but also helps control outbreaks in the community. The important thing is to avoid over-vaccination. To do that, you can have your vet check your dog’s titer values, which let you know whether or not you need to re-vaccinate.
Nutritional Deficiency
A nutritious diet is vital for preventing disease and promoting longevity. Choosing high quality dog food with appropriate ingredients can make a big difference. Dogs can thrive on a diet rich in proteins and Omega fatty acids, which improve coat condition and energy levels. Engaging with a veterinarian about the best dietary choices can help tailor nutrition to suit your dog’s specific needs and lifestyles.
Regular Veterinary Visits
Routine veterinary visits are essential for maintaining a dog’s health. These check-ups can catch potential issues early, such as dental disease or skin allergies, which may otherwise go unnoticed. For example, you may have a Beagle who seems perfectly fine until a routine visit reveals severe dental problems. After treatment, her energy returns, showcasing the importance of proactive healthcare. Regular visits ensure dogs stay on track for a long, healthy life.
Conclusion
The journey to ensuring a long, healthy life for your dog is filled with education, proactive measures, and love. By having the knowledge about common diseases to avoid in dogs , dog parents can foster an environment where their furry friends flourish.
Post Views: 77
Animal Wellness is North America’s top natural health and lifestyle magazine for dogs and cats, with a readership of over one million every year. AW features articles by some of the most renowned experts in the pet industry, with topics ranging from diet and health related issues, to articles on training, fitness and emotional well being.
Animal Wellness
Source link -
Behind the Recovery: Ryan Kent’s Cutting-Edge Approach to Healing and Longevity Without Surgery
Blending regenerative medicine and a focus on long-term health, Ryan Kent is helping athletes and patients recover faster, avoid invasive procedures, and improve their longevity.
LISLE, Ill., October 17, 2024 (Newswire.com)
–
In a world where surgery often feels like the only solution for serious injuries or chronic pain, Ryan Kent, Full-Practice Authority Nurse Practitioner at Defiant Health Spa, is quietly changing the rules. Using cutting-edge techniques like PRP (Platelet Rich Plasma) injections, stem cells, and peptides, Kent is helping the body heal itself from within. His approach is becoming a crucial alternative for athletes and patients who thought surgery was their only option.Kent isn’t in it for fame, but his work speaks for itself. Whether helping athletes make a comeback or guiding patients away from the operating table, he’s redefining what’s possible in modern medicine.
A High School Quarterback’s Return to the Field
In October, a small-town high school quarterback—poised to impress college scouts—took a brutal hit that shattered his throwing wrist. Torn ligaments and severe damage left his football future hanging by a thread. Although doctors repaired the damage, the recovery was projected to take at least a year—long enough to jeopardize his senior season and college prospects.
That’s when Kent stepped in. Working with the quarterback’s medical team, he created a post-surgical regenerative plan that leveraged PRP injections to flood the wrist with growth factors, stem cells to regenerate damaged tissues, and peptides to reduce inflammation and speed up healing.
In just three months, the quarterback regained full motion. By the fourth month, he was back on the practice field, and by the sixth month, he was fully cleared to play—stronger than ever. Kent’s approach wasn’t just about recovery; it was about saving a career.
A Golfer’s Return to Form
For a scratch golfer in his 40s, life revolved around the game—until chronic tennis elbow and golfer’s elbow made it impossible to play. Every swing became agonizing, and even daily activities were a struggle. Surgery seemed inevitable.
Kent offered an advanced, non-surgical solution: ultrasound-guided PRP injections, mesenchymal stem cells from the golfer’s own bone marrow to regenerate tissue, and BPC-157, a peptide known for tendon repair. Over several months, the golfer saw real progress. “By the third treatment, I was back to light chipping,” he says. By the fifth month, he was swinging pain-free.
Kent explains, “Our goal isn’t just temporary relief; it’s to rebuild the body from the inside out.” The golfer credits Kent with restoring not only his game but his confidence.
Changing the Landscape of Medicine
Kent’s methods are gaining traction not only in athletics but among patients looking to avoid surgery and pharmaceutical dependence. In a system where chronic pain is often treated with invasive procedures or addictive medications, Kent offers a more sustainable solution.
By treating the root causes of pain, rather than just masking symptoms, his approach challenges the “quick fix” mentality that often leads to repeated surgeries or long-term reliance on drugs. His treatments prioritize the body’s natural ability to heal itself, offering a path to lasting recovery and well-being.
“We’re here to restore function and health naturally, without sending patients toward the operating table or a lifetime of pharmaceuticals,” Kent says.
The Future of Healing
Kent’s work is reshaping how we think about recovery and rehabilitation. With a focus on personalized, minimally invasive treatments, he’s helping athletes and everyday patients alike avoid surgery and regain their quality of life.
“We’re just scratching the surface of what’s possible when we work with the body’s natural processes,” Kent explains. Whether saving careers or improving daily lives, he’s leading the charge toward a more thoughtful, sustainable approach to healing.
Source: Defiant Health
-
Yes, There's A Longevity Vitamin (& People Over 40 Need To Prioritize It)
You’re likely not getting enough.
-
Unbelievable facts
Hawaii has the highest life expectancy in the United States, with residents living an average of…
-
What’s the Best Weight-Loss and Disease-Prevention Diet? | NutritionFacts.org
The most effective diet for weight loss may also be the most healthful.
Why are vegetarian diets so effective in preventing and treating diabetes? Maybe it is because of the weight loss. As I discuss in my video The Best Diet for Weight Loss and Disease Prevention, those eating more plant-based tend to be significantly slimmer. That isn’t based on looking at a cross-section of the population either. You can perform an interventional trial and put it to the test in a randomized, controlled community-based trial of a whole food, plant-based diet.
“The key difference between this trial [of plant-based nutrition] and other approaches to weight loss was that participants were informed to eat the WFPB [whole food, plant-based] diet ad libitum and to focus efforts on diet, rather than increasing exercise.” Ad libitum means they could eat as much as they want; there was no calorie counting or portion control. They just ate. It was about improving the quality of the food rather than restricting the quantity of food. In the study, the researchers had participants focus just on a diet rather than exercising more exercise because they wanted to isolate the effects of eating more healthfully.
So, what happened? At the start of the study, the participants were, on average, obese at nearly 210 pounds (95 kg) with an average height of about 5’5” (165 cm). Three months into the trial, they were down about 18 pounds (8 kg)—without portion restrictions and eating all the healthy foods they wanted. At six months in, they were closer to 26 pounds (12 kg) lighter. You know how these weight-loss trials usually go, though. However, this wasn’t an institutional study where the participants were locked up and fed. In this trial, no meals were provided. The researchers just informed them about the benefits of plant-based eating and encouraged them to eat that way on their own, with their own families, and in their own homes, in their own communities. What you typically see in these “free-living” studies is weight loss at six months, with the weight creeping back or even getting worse by the end of a year. But, in this study, the participants were able to maintain that weight loss all year, as you can see below and at 1:57 in my video.
What’s more, their cholesterol got better, too, but the claim to fame is that they “achieved greater weight loss at 6 and 12 months than any other trial that does not limit energy [caloric] intake or mandate regular exercise.” That’s worth repeating. A whole food, plant-based diet achieved the greatest weight loss ever recorded at 6 and 12 months compared to any other such intervention published in the medical literature. Now, obviously, with very low-calorie starvation diets, you can drop down to any weight. “However, medically supervised liquid ‘meal replacements’ are not intended for ongoing use”—obviously, they’re just short-term fixes—“and are associated with ‘high costs, high attrition rates, and a high probability of regaining 50% or more of lost weight in 1 to 2 years.’” In contrast, the whole point of whole food, plant-based nutrition is to maximize long-term health and longevity.
What about low-carb diets? “Studies on the effects of low-carbohydrate diets have shown higher rates of all-cause mortality”—meaning a shorter lifespan—“decreased peripheral flow-mediated dilation [artery function], worsening of coronary artery disease, and increased rates of constipation, headache, halitosis [bad breath], muscle cramps, general weakness, and rash.”
The point of weight loss is not to fit into a smaller casket. A whole food, plant-based diet is more effective than low-carb diets for weight loss and has the bonus of having all good side effects, such as decreasing the risk of diabetes beyond just weight loss.
“The lower risk of type 2 diabetes among vegetarians may be explained in part by improved weight status (i.e., lower BMI). However, the lower risk also may be explained by higher amounts of ingested dietary fiber and plant protein, the absence of meat- and egg-derived protein and heme iron, and a lower intake of saturated fat. Most studies report the lowest risk of type 2 diabetes among individuals who adhere to vegan diets. This may be explained by the fact that vegans, in contrast to ovo- and lacto-ovo-vegetarians, do not ingest eggs. Two separate meta-analyses linked egg consumption with a higher risk of type 2 diabetes.”
Maybe it’s eating lower on the food chain, thereby avoiding the highest levels of persistent organic pollutants, like dioxins, PCBs, and DDT in animal products. Those have been implicated as a diabetes risk factor. Or maybe it has to do with the gut microbiome. With all that fiber in a plant-based diet, it’s no surprise there would be fewer disease-causing bugs and more protective gut flora, which can lead to less inflammation throughout the body that “may be the key feature linking the vegan gut microbiota with protective health effects”—including the metabolic dysfunction you can see in type 2 diabetes.
The multiplicity of benefits from eating plant-based can help with compliance and family buy-in. “Whereas a household that includes people who do not have diabetes may be unlikely to enthusiastically follow a ‘diabetic diet,’ a low-fat plant-based approach is not disease-specific and has been shown to improve other chronic conditions. While the patient [with diabetes] will likely see improvement in A1C [blood sugar control], a spouse suffering from constipation or high blood pressure may also see improvements, as may children with weight issues,” if you make healthy eating a family affair.
This is just a taste of my New York Times best-selling book, How Not to Diet. (As with all of my books, all proceeds I received went to charity.) Watch the book trailer. You may also be interested in its companion, The How Not to Diet Cookbook.
Check out my hour-long Evidence-Based Weight Loss lecture for more.
Michael Greger M.D. FACLM
Source link -
How Women Can Prevent Dementia In Their 40s (& Beyond)
These reproductive hormones push neurons to bring glucose and make energy—thus, if your hormone levels are high, your brain energy is high. “But then what happens to testosterone is that it doesn’t quite decline that much over time; whereas for women, estrogens pretty much plummet when women go through menopause,” she explains. “If you think of these hormones as having some kind of superpowers for the brain, women lose the superpower around the time that menopause hits, right? And the brain is left a little more vulnerable.”