Could This Be The Best Anti-Aging Exercise?

Too many of us would rather give up and resign ourselves to the eventually crippling aging process than do one of the most potent anti-aging therapies currently known: regular exercise. For those of us who have been won over by the rest of our lives becoming so much more enjoyable as a result of regular physical activity, the question is: what type of exercise has the most bang for our buck? Well recently, a team of scientists in the USA have found that high-intensity interval training (HIIT), a relatively new exercise technique, may be the most effective type of physical activity in the fight against aging.

HIIT involves alternating between short, vigorous bursts of exercise and going at a lighter, slower pace. This can be done with a variety of exercise types, such as cycling, running or swimming. For this study, healthy (without chronic illness) participants from both an older and younger age group were assigned to one of three types of exercise for twelve weeks. Some did HIIT with cycling and running, others did weight training, and others still did a moderate amount of both. In total, there were 29 adults aged 18-30 and 23 adults aged 65-80 who completed their assigned exercise program. The researchers measured a range of health and fitness parameters both before and 72 hours after these exercise programs.

They found that all three types of exercise increased muscle mass and strength for both groups, especially with weight training. This is important because unchecked biological aging causes a progressive loss in muscle mass and strength, which is not only unsightly, but also dangerous to our health and independence. All groups also showed an increase in insulin sensitivity, which is likely to mean a reduced risk of diabetes (and the very pro-aging process of glycation). In addition to this, both groups who did HIIT, whether alone or in combination, saw a boost in the amount of oxygen they consumed at peak intensity, which is an indicator of cardiovascular fitness. The younger volunteers who did HIIT alone increased it by 28%, while the older group saw an increase of 17%. For the mixed program, it was 17% and 21% respectively. This could mean that a combination of exercise types is best for people over the age of 65. Those in the HIIT groups also experienced improvements in the ability of their mitochondria to produce energy. These are small "organelles" (meaning "little organs") in our cells that produce all of our energy. In the HIIT-only groups, the younger volunteers had a 49% increase in mitochondria capacity, and the older volunteers saw a very impressive 69% improvement. In the mixed groups, only the younger volunteers saw their mitochondrial capacity improve, by 38%. Biological aging causes a decline in mitochondrial function too, which could at least partly explain why older people usually lose energy. HIIT also boosted the function of the protein-producing parts of our cells, known as the ribosomes.

It has been known for many years now that exercise can increase lifespan and reduce mortality rates, with one earlier study in the 1980s showing a 1-2 year benefit to longevity. This may have been an underestimation, as many of the volunteers may have decided to improve their health habits after signing up for the study. Exercise was also found to be more important than family history. Overall, HIIT has added benefits that other exercise types do not seem to possess, but if you want to start and have a medical condition, always consult your doctor first.

Three Herbs and Spices That May Relieve Anxiety and Depression

Mental health disorders, such as depression and anxiety, are sadly common, affecting about 18% of the American population. The mainstream perspective is that anyone with one or more of these disorders has a "chemical imbalance" in their brains, and therefore they must take pharmaceutical drugs to manage it. However, these drugs are often ineffective or come with side effects that may be worse than the actual illness. Then, there is also the question of what exactly this "chemical imbalance" is, and where it came from. These causes can actually be the quite preventable problems of nutrient deficiencies, inflammation or hormone imbalances, and thankfully there are natural medicines that can help without being so debilitating.

Botanical illustration of saffron.

Once again, one of these is turmeric, more specifically, curcumin, its main "active ingredient". In a study of 60 people with Major Depressive Disorder (MDD), everyone was assigned to either fluoxetine, 1000mg of curcumin, or both for six weeks. After the six weeks, it turned out that all three interventions were roughly equal in effectiveness. This ranged from about a 62-78% response rate, but the differences were not seen as significant. The average improvements in the HAM-D17 depression scores were also similar. These results mean that the choice between natural, pharmaceutical or integrative treatment can be entirely up to the individual, based on their beliefs and values, in at least some cases. In another study on 108 Chinese men, adding curcumin to their usual antidepressant use resulted in significant benefits to their depression scores. Levels of salivary cortisol (the primary stress hormone), as well as some inflammatory immune chemicals, also fell significantly.

Another of these is rosemary, a common staple of kitchen gardens. While we know the herb as an ancient memory aid, one much more recent study tested its effects with lavender on nursing students about to sit an exam. Use of these two oils together resulted in improved anxiety scores, which were backed up by personal statements and pulse measurements. Research on mice has also found anti-anxiety effects of rosemary, possibly by reducing cholinesterase enzymes, some of the enzymes that break down neurotransmitters.

On the more expensive side is saffron, a spice that is essentially part of a flower's tiny reproductive area. A meta-analysis of 2 placebo-controlled trials and 3 antidepressant-controlled trials studied what effects it may have on major depressive disorder, a condition where the expense is likely worth it for a safe, effective natural therapy. It was found that saffron performed significantly better than placebos, and had similar efficacy to antidepressant pharmaceuticals. The average Jadad score was 5, meaning that these were high-quality trials. Overall, there are effective natural alternatives to pharmaceuticals for depression and anxiety, we just have to keep our minds open, and enlist the help of qualified practitioners.

A High-Starch Diet May Prevent Type I Diabetes

Type I diabetes is usually seen as unrelated to diet and lifestyle, and therefore something that cannot be prevented, unlike Type II diabetes. Fortunately now, a new Australian study is gaining significant attention, as it may hold the key to finally preventing the disease in significant numbers of at-risk children.

Type I diabetes, or juvenile diabetes, is an autoimmune disease; that is, it involves the immune system "turning against" the body and attacking the cells in the pancreas that produce insulin. Most cases appear before the age of 14, and those diagnosed must have daily injections of insulin in order to survive for the rest of their lives. Working with the CSIRO, Australia's national science agency, researchers at Melbourne's Monash University developed a diet rich in a certain type of fibre, resistant starch, that is broken down in the intestines to produce short-chain fatty acids. These short-chain fatty acids, butyrate and acetate, have previously been found to help balance out the immune system, preventing it from creating too much inflammation and related damage. For this preclinical study, the researchers compared mice on a normal diet and mice on the high-resistant starch diet. All were bred to develop the mouse equivalent of Type I diabetes. The mice on the normal diet had a 70% chance of developing diabetes by 30 weeks; however, those eating significant amounts of resistant starch were almost completely protected against the disease.

"We think our study establishes the concept that we can stop a disease with natural medicinal food", immunologist Charles Mackay says, when in fact he is finding out for himself what naturopaths and other practitioners of traditional systems of medicine have known for years, even centuries. The next step is clinical trials in humans, and although he says it's "too early to tell" whether or not this diet works in people, we should be eating foods high in resistant starch anyway. These include potatoes, bananas, cashews, oats, white beans and lentils. Research has already shown that foods and probiotics that would increase short-chain fatty acid production can improve cognitive control, such as working memory, ability to multitask and focus, as well as reduce anxiety. This is most likely caused by the complex interactions between the digestive system, immune system and the brain.

There has also already been research on what may cause type I diabetes to develop, and in humans too! Multiple studies have found that cow's milk consumption in genetically vulnerable people can raise the risk of developing type I diabetes. In one of the newer studies, Finnish researchers tracked 1,113 babies who were at risk of developing diabetes during childhood, and were assigned to receive one of three formulas whenever breast milk was unavailable. These were cow's milk formula, whey-based hydrolysed formula and a whey-based formula free of cow insulin. Antibodies to the children's own pancreatic beta-cells (insulin-producing cells) were measured up until three years of age. Compared to the normal cow's milk formula, the whey-based hydrolysed formula was linked to a 25% lower risk of autoantibodies, and the bovine insulin-free formula was linked to a 61% reduced risk of having autoantibodies. The cow insulin may have "taught" their immune systems that insulin is a "threat" that must be eliminated, especially as other components of cow's milk may be pro-inflammatory. Overall, type I diabetes is not something we are helpless against, even if we do have to change long-standing habits.

Lactic Acid May Affect Cancer Development, According to a New Study

Just in time for another round of disempowering nonsense, telling us all that cancer is caused by "bad luck", a new study appears that may help to vindicate the Warburg effect. At the beginning of the 20th century, the German scientist Otto Warburg found that cancer cells have a higher demand for sugar than normal cells. They are more reliant on glycolysis than healthy cells, which is far less efficient at turning sugar into cellular energy than aerobic (oxygen-dependent) respiration. All cells use glycolysis as the first stage in energy production (Principles of Anatomy and Physiology - Tortora and Derrickson, 2012), but in the presence of oxygen a healthy cell will then use the breakdown products of glycolysis to begin aerobic respiration. Without oxygen, these breakdown products will enter the Cori Cycle to produce lactic acid, or lactate. A buildup of lactic acid in the muscles causes them to become tired and stiff; you may notice this during intense exercise. Warburg found that even in the presence of oxygen, cancer cells seem to produce more lactic acid than healthy cells.

Source: Steve Barnes (CC BY-SA: 2.0)

In this new research led by Inigo San Millan, director of the Sports Performance Department and physiology laboratory at the University of Colorado-Boulder's Sports Medicine and Performance Center, he and his team set out to understand why the Warburg effect happens. They found that common changes to gene expression, found in most cancers, also seem to deregulate lactic acid production. The researchers also explain that lactic acid helps to create an acidic environment outside the cancer cells, which helps them to spread around the body. In fact, San Millan and colleagues suggest that lactic acid is the "only metabolic compound involved and necessary" in the five stages of cancer development after carcinogenesis, the transformation of healthy cells into cancerous ones. It could also help to explain why regular exercise helps to prevent cancer. Regular workouts help to train the body to efficiently recycle lactic acid into something that actually can be used for energy, which prevents harmful accumulation (why you eventually grow accustomed to that workout). High sugar intake combined with a sedentary lifestyle may be even worse for cancer risk. It may also explain why regular exercise has been shown to increase cancer survival rates.

This research may lead to therapies that reduce the accumulation of lactic acid, in order to prevent cancer cells from spreading and avoiding the immune system. Although the effects of improved stress management on immunity are a likely factor, it could also help explain why living in the greenest spaces has been linked to a 13% lower risk of cancer death compared to living in an urban jungle. This Harvard University study on 110,000 women also found a 12% higher risk of all-cause mortality among the urban jungle dwellers. Overall, any evidence that can point to methods of natural cancer prevention is a good thing, and hopefully the health industries will stand up and take notice of these findings.

References
1: http://www.lifeextension.com/News/LefDailyNews?NewsID=26475&Section=DISEASE
2: https://oup.silverchair-cdn.com/oup/backfile/Content_public/Journal/carcin/38/2/10.1093_carcin_bgw127/2/bgw127.pdf?Expires=1490855249&Signature=SW3OCcNTBN~-enlCEDduD-WP~pSsbgdWkw-B65iRne8BKaUzpnVGit0z1pZsMr~0NOak-BYuc2JuD03vRnbozr7KoLFt7tE-1HWM~VVOk-mIQlfI8hJWPFDcjVCNGvP~Bvlh5pkeRp75037-bwedWHZR9n441HJdlL~wdGKjBpweVSQF1lQa79iFVpfv2SAGf1ws~B-x7LYlvzBq3i9qa3y2oM4W2mebgTXL2soqNj4EBtTttcPlFEmL~Yl6kH421lSU7XP3dxH0GDwuioQOFI2RGjQeVonsyb3DCO~DRgXL8aKf8oW7MHlM3Fx~dcN33rxAlm7mK2BOX6CTOtmD-g__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAIUCZBIA4LVPAVW3Q
3: http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-03-25-living-in-the-country-found-to-reduce-the-risk-of-death-by-16-compared-to-city-life.html

Is Ibuprofen Dangerous?

Most people think that because something is legal and easily accessible, it is safe to use in "recommended" amounts and methods. However, new research shows that one of the most accessible pharmaceutical drugs, ibuprofen, may in fact be killing thousands of people every year.

According to the Sudden Cardiac Arrest Foundation, sudden cardiac arrest - literally, your heart stopping - is a leading cause of death in adults over 40 around the world. In the USA alone, 326,000 people suffer from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest every year, and around 90% of them do not survive. Last year, this included the actress Carrie Fisher, but sadly nothing seems to have changed in the average person's consciousness in regards to cardiac event prevention. The conventional medical world still points the finger at vague, often uncontrollable risk factors like family history, previous heart problems or high LDL cholesterol.

Studying how to treat cardiac arrest, although prevention
is vastly superior.

Finally, a recent press release issued by the European Society of Cardiology titled "Harmless" Painkillers Associated with Increased Risk of Cardiac Arrest attempted to alert the health industry of a not-so-obvious but easily preventable cause of death. This was based on a study published on the Christmas Eve of 2016, a few days before Carrie Fisher died. The study is no joke: the cases of 28,947 people on the Danish Cardiac Arrest Registry were analysed, which was everyone who had suffered an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest from the years 2001-2010. Of these, 3,376 had used NSAIDs up to 30 days before cardiac arrest. Their cases were compared to 115,788 people, matched for age and sex, who did not have a cardiac arrest. Ibuprofen and diclofenac were the most common NSAIDs, representing 51% and 21.8% respectively of total NSAID use. Ibuprofen was linked with a 31% increased risk of cardiac arrest, and diclofenac was linked with a higher risk. Naproxen, celecoxib and rofecoxib were also linked with higher risk of cardiac arrest, but these were not seen as significant (caused by use of the drugs). However, these groups only had a few cardiac events.

The authors wrote that this was not the first time that NSAID use, especially the selective COX-2 inhibitors, have been linked to adverse cardiac events (there are two versions of the inflammatory cyclo-oxygenase enzymes, COX-1 and COX-2). One meta-analysis they described, by Bhala et al., reported double the risk of major coronary events with the use of ibuprofen, a 70% higher risk of major coronary events with diclofenac and a 65% higher risk of vascular deaths with diclofenac use. When Trelle et al. compared ibuprofen use with placebo, they found a 30% higher risk of heart attack, cardiovascular death and death from any cause. With diclofenac, they found a higher risk of cardiovascular death with a rate ratio of four. However, these analysed high-dose use of ibuprofen, at 2,400mg a day, but this may be more common than we think. Other research had found harmful effects of rofecoxib, which was withdrawn from the market in Denmark in 2006.

All of this means that it's now time to look at more natural ways of controlling pain. Depending on the cause of pain, a qualified naturopath, acupuncturist, chiropractor or osteopath can help to uncover the root causes of pain and put together a treatment plan so you can truly heal, not just mask the symptoms.

Is Staying Inside a Public Health Emergency?

Vitamin D is unique among the nutrients, as it is the only one that we can produce by sun exposure. It is made from cholesterol molecules, so naturally-occurring food sources of the vitamin are always from animals, but there are many products fortified with vitamin D such as milk. This is why so many people do not consider the possibility of vitamin D deficiency being found in a wealthy country. However, the best way to "consume" vitamin D is still by sun exposure without burning. But the sun is dangerous, the government says. So, is there a problem?

Unfortunately, yes there is. After the Industrial Revolution and before foods were fortified with vitamin D, rickets (severe deficiency) affected 85% of children in European and American cities. But despite these public health measures, recent research has uncovered more subtle deficiencies at unbelievably high rates. For example, over half of certain elderly populations and 30% of healthy young adults in Boston have been found to be vitamin D deficient. In one Boston study, half of the women admitted to hospital for hip fractures were deficient. Older people do not produce vitamin D at the same efficiency as younger people, while our society seems to encourage them to stay inside. However, low vitamin D has been linked to weaker quadriceps, reduced postural stability, slower reaction times and overall poorer physical function in people admitted to fall clinics. On the other hand, a large placebo-controlled study found that giving adults aged 65-85 100,000 units of vitamin D every three months reduced the risk of any fracture by 22%, and osteoporosis by 33%. This was without an additional calcium supplement. Society tells us that when someone is infirm, we must "look after" them by keeping them shut inside and away from "doing too much". It looks like it's time to re-evaluate our ideas, and the way our lives are structured. Our previous struggles for survival may have led us to associate nature with danger, and so favour the indoors, but the way we work, play and even build our houses possibly should be restructured to enable the right amount of exposure to sun and air.

Many of us now seem to fear the sun because of its association with skin cancers. However, this may be an all-or-nothing approach, taken to extremes. Dr David Hoel writes:

"The body of science concerning the benefits of moderate sun exposure is growing rapidly, and is causing a different perception of sun/UV as it relates to human health. Melanoma and its relationship to sun exposure and sunburn is not adequately addressed in most of the scientific literature."

Research has also shown that outdoor workers may actually have a 14% lower risk of melanoma than people who work inside. It is not as one-sided as the PSAs tell you: non-burning sun exposure has been linked to a reduced risk of melanoma, while sunburn doubles the risk of developing the cancer. Many others have shown that vitamin D reduces the risk of different types of cancer such as breast, colon and prostate cancers. Some of these benefits are only seen with sun exposure, not vitamin D status in general which includes supplementation.

High blood levels of vitamin D are also linked with lower all-cause mortality. When 32 studies were analysed in a meta-analysis (research on research), vitamin D levels under 9ng/mL were associated with a 90% higher all-cause death rate compared to people with levels over 50ng/mL. In a study involving women in Sweden, avoiding sun exposure was linked with double the risk of death over the research period, compared to those who embraced the outdoors. Looking at all of this, it's no surprise that researchers have now said:

"Insufficient sun exposure has become a major public health problem, demanding an immediate change in the current sun-avoidance public health advice. The degree of change needed is small but critically important."

Let's change things sooner rather than later.

Some of Aging May Be Man-Made

Our lifespan and many other aspects of our quality of life have greatly improved over the centuries. We came from a world where almost all of us lived in extreme poverty and half died by 30, to a world where global life expectancy is 72 and counting, less than 10% of us are extremely poor and an increasing number of us have the freedom to live on our own terms. But some of our progress isn't really progress, as it has come to the detriment of our health. What went wrong, and how can we live a more balanced life, with the best of both worlds?

Rainforest in Bolivia. Source: Elias Bizannes

Recently, a study emerged on the Tsimane, a hunter-gatherer society in the Bolivian Amazon. At about 16,000 people, they are a small culture, but one of the most researched indigenous groups in the world. For this study, 705 people first spent a day canoeing, as usual, then took a 6-hour drive to the nearest city so doctors could take computer scans of their hearts and measure their weight, heart rate, cholesterol, blood pressure and blood sugar. In exchange for their time, they were given small gifts such as thread and yarn, things they can actually use. After all this, it was found that the average middle-aged Tsimane has arteries that are 28 years younger than those of average Westerners! When compared to over 6,800 Americans, they were one-fifth as likely to have heart disease, and 9 out of 10 had absolutely no risk of developing it. The Tsimane don't drink or smoke often, their traditional diet is low in added fat and sugar, and they exercise four to seven hours daily on average. However, those using motorised canoes and eating processed foods are showing signs that they are at risk of heart disease, such as higher blood cholesterol. Fortunately this means that lifestyle has power over genetics. Unfortunately (for some), it means that we do have to restructure our lives and society to allow for more incidental exercise. Perhaps cycling to work and other places should be made easier; and workplaces should be re-imagined in a way that physical activity is built-in to the job.

Similar situations have been seen around the world, when people switch from traditional, unprocessed foods to processed, "modern" diets. Often, significant degeneration has taken place within one or two generations, and people of different towns or islands were found to have radically different states of health depending on whether they continued to eat traditional foods, or adopted modern products. In conclusion, the overzealous modernisation of the past century really does need to be tempered by an acknowledgement of the nature of our bodies; we are not meant to be entirely dependent on machines.