"There are no studies that prove the benefits of nutritional or integrative
therapies..."
It's a refrain that I hear time and time again. And I hear it from my
colleagues. But they couldn't be more wrong! They just have not done their
homework -- or perhaps they are reading the wrong medical journals. One of my
favorite medical journals is the "American Journal of Clinical Nutrition," which
every month publishes more than 300 pages of research with NO ADVERTISING.
This is very unlike my other medical journals -- such as the "Journal of the
American Medical Association" or "The New England Journal of Medicine" -- which
have pages and pages of color glossy drug ads. So today, I thought I would take
you on a journey through just one issue of the "American Journal of Clinical
Nutrition" to see just how much research is being done on how food and nutrients
affect our health.
The sad thing is that it can take 20 years before this knowledge becomes
commonplace or used in medical practice. Unfortunately, there is little money
available for large-scale studies or to publicize the findings of the role of
nutrients and food in health and disease. Unlike in the pharmaceutical industry,
there are no "food reps" that drop off food samples in doctor's offices. Except
perhaps in my case!
You see, I have been sent walnuts, whole-food bars, wild salmon, and even
whole-kernel rye bread from Germany -- all of which I like much better than the
pens and cups and Post-it notes with drug names all over them. And I certainly
like these better than the "free" drug samples I'm sent that are meant to get my
patients hooked on the latest and most expensive (though not necessarily the
best) medications.
Advertising medications directly to patients used to be illegal. They still are
in Canada and the European Union. But, boy, have things changed! Since
"direct-to-consumer" advertising has been allowed in the United States, we have
seen dramatic increases in the use of those drugs. In fact, when a person sees
an ad for a drug on TV and then asks their doctor for it, they are likely to get
it about 50 percent of the time. Just look at the numbers.
According to a recent article in "The New England Journal of Medicine,"
pharmaceutical advertising and promotion grew from $11.4 billion in 1996 to
$29.9 billion in 2005 -- and direct- to-consumer ads grew by 330 percent! (1) I
can assure you that NO ONE is spending $30 billion promoting the benefits of
food and nutrients to support health and cure disease, even if they are more
effective. You don't hear about the best or most effective treatments, just the
ones that are most heavily promoted.
Now let's get back to the nutrition journal and a sampling of the types of
research out there that demonstrate the healing power of food. These are all
from the May 2007 issue (I am a little behind on my reading!). The most
important study in that journal was on nutrigenomics -- the foundational concept
of my book UltraMetabolism. The basic idea is that food is information, not just
calories. In this study, researchers from Finland took two groups people with
metabolic syndrome (pre-diabetes) and gave each group a different diet. Well,
sort of. It was different ONLY in the type of carbohydrates they consumed for 12
weeks. The rest of their diet was identical -- the same calories and the same
amount of fat, protein, carbohydrate, and fiber.
The first group had wheat, oats, and potatoes as the source of their carbs. The
second group ate rye as their source of carbohydrate. (As I mentioned in my
book, UltraMetabolism, rye has some very special properties because it is slowly
absorbed by the body and has phytonutrients that help you lose weight and
improve metabolism.) After the 12 weeks, the researchers took a fat sample or
biopsy and analyzed it to find out which genes were turned on or off. So what
happened?
In the wheat, oat, and potato group, 62 genes were activated that increased
inflammation, oxidative stress, and the stress response, worsened blood sugar
balance, and generally amplified all of the forces in the body that lead to
obesity, heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and Alzheimer's disease! It was a 100
percent effect -- NO good genes were turned on. In the rye group, 71 genes were
turned on that prevent diabetes, lower cholesterol, reduce inflammation, and
improve blood sugar control. This was a 100 percent GOOD gene effect. (2) Now
that should have been headline news -- but the rye lobby is just not that
powerful!
In fact, in an accompanying editorial called "Putting your genes on a diet: the
molecular effects of carbohydrate," Harvard researcher David Ludwig, MD, PhD,
wrote that "Molecular pathways involved in hormone action have been the target
of a multi-billion dollar pharmaceutical research effort. However, many of these
pathways may normally be under dietary regulation." (3) If there were a drug
that could turn off all the disease-promoting genes and could turn on all the
health-promoting, anti-aging genes, it would be a blockbuster.
But you don't see ads on TV telling you to eat more whole-kernel rye bread!
Findings from a few other key studies from just that one issue are worth noting:
-- Supplementing with conjugated linoleic acid (a special fat from meat and
dairy fats) caused a modest loss in body fat. It also may prevent cancer, heart
disease, and inflammation.
-- Long-term fish consumption protects against arrhythmia or irregular heart beats.
-- Eating a diet high in monounsaturated fats from olive oil can help reduce blood pressure while a high refined-carbohydrate diet can increase blood pressure.
-- Combining fish oil supplements with regular aerobic exercise helps improve body composition and reduce heart disease risk factors (lower triglycerides, higher HDL).
-- Women need more choline (a nutrient that is needed for cell membrane formation and to make the neurotransmitter acetylcholine necessary for brain function) after menopause or are at risk of liver and muscle damage.
--If women with HIV are given a multivitamin, they have less anemia and their children also have less anemia. Anemia in HIV is associated with a much faster rate of disease progression and death.
-- In Bangladesh, where arsenic poisoning is common, giving folate, vitamins B12 and B6, choline, and niacin reduced the toxic effects of arsenic.
-- People who eat more meat and saturated fat have a higher risk of skin
cancer. And those are just from May!
The June 2007 issue, which I am just getting through, has a fantastic randomized
controlled study of calcium and vitamin D, which shows that those nutrients
substantially reduce risk for all cancers and that the blood level of vitamin D
is the most important predictor of decreased risk. So what are we to learn from
all these studies? This is just a smattering of the research out there -- only a
few out of the many in that one issue alone. And it is stuff you are not hearing
about. So if you hear from your doctor that eating better and taking supplements
has no "real" scientific evidence to support it, ask them if they have read the
"American Journal of Clinical Nutrition" lately.
It is also interesting to note that the main medical journals publish mostly
positive studies on drugs and mostly negative studies on nutrients, foods, and
herbs. And the findings correlate 4 to 1 for a positive outcome for a drug if
the study was funded by the drug company. The same is true for nutrients. Dr.
David Ludwig published a study that showed that if a food company or industry,
like dairy, for example, funded a study, there was a zero percent chance that
the outcome was unfavorable for the funder. But if it was independently funded,
the negative outcomes were about 40 percent. (4) That is exactly what happened
in another study I saw on the effects of high fructose corn syrup. It showed no
adverse effects -- and was funded by the American Beverage Association.
Surprise!
So I encourage you all to beware when someone tells you there is no research to
back up the use of food or nutrients as the primary mode of treatment of disease
and prevention of chronic illness. The evidence is overwhelming -- just ignored.
To your good health,
Mark Hyman, M.D.
(1) Donohue JM, Cevasco M, Rosenthal MB. A decade of
direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs.
(2) Kallio P, Kolehmainen M, Laaksonen DE, Kekalainen J, Salopuro T,
Sivenius K, Pulkkinen L, Mykkanen HM, Niskanen L, Uusitupa M, Poutanen
KS. Dietary carbohydrate modification induces alterations in gene
expression in abdominal subcutaneous adipose tissue in persons with
the metabolic syndrome: the FUNGENUT Study. Am J Clin Nutr. 2007
May;85(5):1417-27.
(3) Salsberg SL, Ludwig DS. Putting your genes on a diet: the
molecular effects of carbohydrate.
Am J Clin Nutr. 2007 May;85(5):1169-70.
(4) Lesser LI, Ebbeling CB, Goozner M, Wypij D, Ludwig DS.
Relationship between funding source and conclusion among
nutrition-related scientific articles.
PLoS Med. 2007 Jan;4(1):e5